Coordinate transformation for isotropy

  • #1
gionole
281
24
The following question struck me by accident.

Would appreciate to let me know the flaw in my logic, no need to deviate from this approach.

We know that on small-scale, experiment such as dropping ball from some height to the earth tells us that space is non-isotropic, because of preferred direction. I was trying to mathematically detect non-isotropy of such case. Here is how.

Experiment 1:

in ##x, y## frame, we have: ##m\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(mgy)## by which we get: ##\ddot y = -g##.

Experiment 2:

We rotate our own coordinate system, while everything stays in place. Some call this passive transformation. The rotation matrix is given by:

##y = x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta##
##x = x'cos\theta - y'sin\theta##

Since ##y = x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta## and earth stays the same place, potential energy of the ball doesn't really change, so we can replace ##y## by ##x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta## in the ##m\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(mgy)## to get equation of motion in ##x', y'## frame.

##m\frac{d^2}{dt^2}(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta) = -\frac{d}{dy'}(mg(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta))##

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -gcos\theta##

##\ddot x'sin\theta = 0## since acceleration is non-present in that direction.

We're left with:

##\ddot y'= -g##.

It seems equation of motions of the ball is exactly the same in x,y and x',y' frame and this kind of suggests that space is isotropic, while we know that it's not isotropic. Where am I making a mistake ? I'm using general transformation matrix, so I shouldn't be needing to use specific ##\theta## insertions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
gionole said:
##\ddot x'sin\theta = 0## since acceleration is non-present in that direction.
This is wrong because ##\ddot x'## is a linear combination of both ##\ddot x##, ##\ddot y## and ##\ddot y \neq 0##.
 
  • Like
  • Care
Likes gionole and Dale
  • #3
renormalize said:
This is wrong because ##\ddot x'## is a linear combination of both ##\ddot x##, ##\ddot y## and ##\ddot y \neq 0##.
Ah, true, thank you. so we got:

##m\frac{d^2}{dt^2}(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta) = -\frac{d}{dy'}(mg(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta))##

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -gcos\theta##

how do I continue from this to get to the equation that only contains ##\ddot y'##
 
  • #4
gionole said:
Ah, true, thank you. so we got:

##m\frac{d^2}{dt^2}(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta) = -\frac{d}{dy'}(mg(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta))##

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -gcos\theta##

how do I continue from this to get to the equation that only contains ##\ddot y'##
Remember that in the unprimed-frame you also have the second equation-of-motion (EOM) ##m\ddot x=0##. You should transform this equation as well so you end up with two EOMs to solve in the primed-frame.
 
  • Care
Likes gionole
  • #5
In x,y frame, system of equations:

##\ddot x = 0## (1)
##\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(gy)## (2)

we know that:

##x = x'cos\theta - y'sin\theta## (3)
##y = x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta## (4)

so, plugging (3) into (1), we get:

##\ddot x' cos\theta - \ddot y' sin\theta = 0##
##\ddot x' = \frac{\ddot y' sin\theta}{cos\theta}##

plugging (4) into (2),

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -\frac{d}{dy}(g(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta)##

My first question is: should I now do ##\frac{d}{dy}## or ##\frac{d}{dy'}## ? We only changed ##y## by ##x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta##, so I guess, I can't change ##\frac{d}{dy}## by ##\frac{d}{dy'}##, right ? If so, what's ##-\frac{d}{dy}(x'sin\theta)## ? I would need to substitute ##x'## by another transformation that I can get from (3) ?
 
  • #6
gionole said:
In x,y frame, system of equations:

##\ddot x = 0## (1)
##\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(gy)## (2)
You can always apply a rotation-of-coordinates to the partial derivatives. But in this case it's easier to just perform the ##y##-differentiation in eq.(2) to get ##\ddot y = -g## so that you only have to rotate ##x## and ##y##.
 
  • Care
Likes gionole
  • #7
renormalize said:
You can always apply a rotation-of-coordinates to the partial derivatives. But in this case it's easier to just perform the ##y##-differentiation in eq.(2) to get ##\ddot y = -g## so that you only have to rotate ##x## and ##y##.
Yes, I know that, I asked the question in #5 for learning purposes. So, basically, this is how I do it: If you don't got time to go through, here is my 2 short questions:

--Short Version--

Q1: I end up with ##\ddot y' = -gcos\theta##, would you say this is correct ?

Q2: When we have ##\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(gy)##, and when I replace ##y## by ##x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta##, I still don't change wrt derivative (I leave ##dy## and not change it to ##dy'##). Correct ?

-- Long Version--

##\ddot x = 0## (1)
##\ddot y = -\frac{d}{dy}(gy)## (2)

##\ddot x'cos\theta - \ddot y'sin\theta = 0##
##\ddot x' = \frac{\ddot y'sin\theta}{cos\theta}##

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -g\frac{d}{dy}(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta)## (Note that I still leave ##\frac{d}{dy}## here) (3)

Now, we know that ##x'## contains ##y## inside, so we can't really say that ##\frac{d}{dy}(x'sin\theta) = 0##, so we need to get what ##x'## and ##y'## are.

After some math, I end up with:

##x' = xcos\theta + ysin\theta##
##y' = -xsin\theta + ycos\theta##

we put them inside (3).

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -g\frac{d}{dy}(x'sin\theta + y'cos\theta)##
##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -g\frac{d}{dy}((xcos\theta + ysin\theta)sin\theta + (-xsin\theta + ycos\theta)cos\theta)##

##\ddot x'sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = = -g(sin^2\theta + cos^2\theta)##
##\frac{\ddot y'sin\theta}{cos\theta}sin\theta + \ddot y'cos\theta = -g##
##\frac{\ddot y'sin^2\theta}{cos\theta} + \ddot y'cos\theta = -g##
##\frac{\ddot y'sin^2\theta + \ddot y'cos^2\theta}{cos\theta} = -g##
##\ddot y' = -gcos\theta##

Would you say this is all correct ? @renormalize
 
  • #8
gionole said:
##\ddot y' = -gcos\theta##

Would you say this is all correct ? @renormalize
Yes, you have the right expression for ##\ddot y'##, but don't forget to similarly display the second EOM giving ##\ddot x'## in terms of ##g## and ##\theta##.
 
  • Care
Likes gionole

1. What is coordinate transformation for isotropy?

Coordinate transformation for isotropy is a mathematical process used to transform coordinates in a way that preserves isotropy, or uniformity in all directions. This transformation is commonly used in physics and engineering to simplify calculations and analysis.

2. Why is coordinate transformation for isotropy important?

Coordinate transformation for isotropy is important because it allows us to work with simpler coordinate systems that exhibit isotropic properties. This simplification makes it easier to analyze and solve problems in various fields, such as mechanics, electromagnetics, and material science.

3. How is coordinate transformation for isotropy performed?

Coordinate transformation for isotropy is typically performed using rotation matrices or tensor transformations. These mathematical tools allow us to change the orientation of coordinate axes while maintaining isotropy in the system. The specific transformation method used depends on the problem at hand.

4. What are the applications of coordinate transformation for isotropy?

Coordinate transformation for isotropy is widely used in fields such as solid mechanics, fluid dynamics, and crystallography. It is particularly useful in analyzing materials with isotropic properties, where the behavior is the same in all directions. This transformation helps simplify complex calculations and modeling processes.

5. Are there any limitations to coordinate transformation for isotropy?

While coordinate transformation for isotropy is a powerful tool, it may not be suitable for systems with anisotropic properties, where the behavior varies in different directions. In such cases, more advanced transformation techniques may be required to accurately represent the system's characteristics.

Similar threads

  • Classical Physics
Replies
1
Views
526
  • Classical Physics
2
Replies
64
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
585
Replies
8
Views
240
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
202
  • Classical Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top