Arfken, parity operation on a point in polar coordinates

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the parity operation applied to a point in polar coordinates, specifically the transformation of coordinates (\rho, \varphi, z) under reflection through the origin. Participants are exploring how this transformation relates to Cartesian coordinates (x, y, z) and the implications for unit vectors in cylindrical polar coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of parity and its application to polar coordinates, considering how the transformation affects the coordinates and unit vectors. Some express uncertainty about the implications of the transformation on the angle \varphi and how to justify the changes in signs for x and y.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing their reasoning and approaches. Some have proposed using inverse transformations to clarify the relationship between polar and Cartesian coordinates. There is a recognition that the transformations lead to changes in the signs of the coordinates, and some participants have provided insights into the behavior of unit vectors under the parity operation.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of trigonometric functions and their periodicity, particularly in relation to the angle \varphi. There is an acknowledgment of the need to consider quadrant behavior when discussing the transformation of angles.

Clever-Name
Messages
378
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Show that the parity operation (reflection through the origin) on a point [itex](\rho, \varphi, z)[/itex] relative to fixed (x, y, z) axes consists of the transformation:
[tex]\rho \to \rho[/tex]
[tex]\varphi \to \varphi \pm \pi[/tex]
[tex]z \to -z[/tex]

Also, show that the unit vectors of the cylindrical polar coordinate system [itex]\hat{e}_{\rho}[/itex] and [itex]\hat{e}_{\phi}[/itex] have odd parity while [itex]\hat{e}_{z}[/itex] has even parity

Homework Equations


Not sure

The Attempt at a Solution



All I know about Parity is it's definition. I know that for a vector (x,y,z) if you apply the parity operator you get (-x,-y,-z). So I thought maybe if you take the coordinates [itex](\rho, \varphi, z)[/itex] and write it as:
[tex]\rho = \sqrt{x^{2} + y^{2}}[/tex]
[tex]\varphi = arctan(\frac{y}{x})[/tex]
[tex]z = z[/tex]

And apply what I know about Parity I would get:

[tex]\rho' = \sqrt{(-x)^{2} + (-y)^{2}} = \rho[/tex]
[tex]\varphi' = arctan(\frac{-y}{-x}) = \arctan(\frac{y}{x}) = \varphi[/tex]
[tex]z' = -z[/tex]

Now I realize the definition of [itex]\varphi[/itex] depends on the x and y values, so I suppose I could reason that it should be [itex]\varphi \pm \pi[/itex] based on that, but I'm uncomfortable just outright stating it. I feel like there should be more to it.I haven't attempted the last part yet.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Show that those transformations cause x ➝ -x, y ➝ -y, and z ➝ -z.
 
I'm not sure I follow...

For [itex]z \to -z[/itex] it's obvious.

For [itex]\rho \to \rho[/itex] there is no restriction on the sign of x or y so I supposed this could imply [itex]x \to -x[/itex] and [itex]y \to -y[/itex] but I'm not sure how I could definitively state that.

and for [itex]\phi \to \phi \pm \pi[/itex] I'm completely lost as to how to approach it.

edit - for [itex]\phi[/itex] would it be appropriate to look at the angle in the 4 quadrants and add/subtract pi to see how this changes the x and y value according to quadrant?
 
I meant use the inverse transformations, where x and y are written in terms of ρ and Φ. You avoid the complication that's introduced because tangent has period of only pi, as opposed to 2pi.
 
Ok so if

[itex]x = \rho cos(\phi)[/itex]
and
[itex]y = \rho sin(\phi)[/itex]

and we take [itex]\phi \to \phi + \pi[/itex]
we get
[itex]x = \rho cos(\phi + \pi) = \rho (-cos(\phi)) = -x[/itex]
and
[itex]y = \rho sin(\phi + \pi) = \rho (-sin(\phi)) = -y[/itex]

and the same follows for negative pi.

This is a sufficient way to answer the problem? To 'work backwards' in a sense?
 
Yeah. You're showing that that change does in fact change r to -r, which is all the problem asked you to do.
 
Oh alright, perfect, thank you. Now the last part should then fall out as follows:

Since the unit vectors are defined as:

[tex]\hat{e}_{\rho} = [cos(\phi), sin(\phi), 0][/tex]
[tex]\hat{e}_{\phi} = [-sin(\phi), cos(\phi), 0][/tex]
[tex]\hat{e}_{z} = [0,0,1][/tex]

Applying the operation [itex]\phi \to \phi \pm \pi[/itex] gives us:
[tex]\hat{e}_{\rho} = [cos(\phi), sin(\phi), 0] \to [-cos(\phi), -sin(\phi), 0] = -\hat{e}_{\rho}[/tex]
[tex]\hat{e}_{\phi} = [-sin(\phi), cos(\phi), 0] \to [sin(\phi), -cos(\phi), 0] = -\hat{e}_{\phi}[/tex]
[tex]\hat{e}_{z} = [0,0,1] \to [0, 0, 1] = \hat{e}_{z}[/tex]

Since the z unit vector didn't change it has even parity, and since the other 2 changed in sign they have odd parity.

I just wanted to post the rest of the solution for anyone else who might come across this problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K