I Angular Velocity: Vector or Not?

AI Thread Summary
Angular velocity is classified as an axial vector, which behaves differently from traditional vectors under transformations, particularly during reflections. In three dimensions, it is considered a pseudovector, possessing both magnitude and direction, but remaining unchanged when the coordinate system is mirrored. The cross product of two polar vectors results in a pseudovector, while the cross product of a pseudovector and a polar vector yields a vector. This distinction is crucial for understanding the relationship between angular velocity and tangential velocity, especially when considering the cross product with the radius vector. Overall, the discussion clarifies the mathematical properties of angular velocity and its implications in vector calculus.
e2m2a
Messages
354
Reaction score
13
I understand that angular velocity is technically not a vector so does that mean the cross product of the radius vector and the angular velocity vector, the tangential vector, is also not a vector?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Angular velocity is an axial vector, i.e., it transforms as ##\vec{\omega} \rightarrow \vec{\omega}## under space reflections, while a polar vector like the usual velocity transforms as ##\vec{v} \rightarrow -\vec{v}##. Wrt. rotations axial vectors transform in the same as polar vectors.

An axial vector is always equivalent to an antisymmetric tensor. For Cartesian components you can map the axial-vector components to the tensor components via
$$\Omega_{jk}=\epsilon_{jkl} \omega_l$$
and the other way
$$\omega_l=\frac{1}{2} \epsilon_{jkl} \Omega_{jk}.$$
In both formulae the Einstein summation convention is used, and ##\epsilon_{jkl}## is the Levi-Civita symbol which is defined by ##\epsilon_{123}=1## and being antisymmetric under exchange of any index pair. This implies that it's 0 if at least two of the indices are equal.

It's also easy to see that the cross product of two polar or two axial vectors is an axial vector, while the cross product of a polar and axial vector is a polar vector.
 
e2m2a said:
I am told that angular velocity is not a vector so does that mean the cross product between the radius vector and angular velocity vector, the tangential velocity vector, is also not a vector?
If you are working in the two dimensional plane then angular velocity has only one dimension. It is a scalar.

If you are working in three dimensions then angular velocity is a pseudovector. It has magnitude and direction, but if you do a mirror reflection on your coordinate system so that all of your vectors change signs, the pseudovectors remain unchanged. So picky mathematical types do not want to call them vectors.

Taking the cross product of the angular momentum [pseudo]vector and the radius vector will do just fine to get you a velocity vector.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and berkeman
In three dimensions, the cross product of two (polar) vectors gives a pseudovector. The cross product of a pseudovector and a vector gives a vector. The cross product of two pseudovectors gives a pseudovector.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes vanhees71 and jbriggs444
jbriggs444 said:
If you are working in the two dimensional plane then angular velocity has only one dimension. It is a scalar.

If you are working in three dimensions then angular velocity is a pseudovector. It has magnitude and direction, but if you do a mirror reflection on your coordinate system so that all of your vectors change signs, the pseudovectors remain unchanged. So picky mathematical types do not want to call them vectors.

Taking the cross product of the angular momentum [pseudo]vector and the radius vector will do just fine to get you a velocity vector.
Ok. Thanks for the explanation.
 
Dale said:
In three dimensions, the cross product of two (polar) vectors gives a pseudovector. The cross product of a pseudovector and a vector gives a vector. The cross product of two pseudovectors gives a pseudovector.
All right. Thanks. That clears things up.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top