Axial angular momentum calculation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation and properties of angular momentum and the moment of inertia tensor in rigid body dynamics. Participants explore the definitions, mathematical representations, and implications of these concepts, particularly in relation to different reference frames and the center of mass (CoM).

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define angular momentum as a covector and discuss the moment of inertia tensor as a (0,2)-rank tensor that relates angular velocity to angular momentum.
  • There is a suggestion that the moment of inertia tensor can be expressed relative to the CoM, but it can also be calculated from any point.
  • One participant questions whether the inertia tensor can depend on the body's absolute position in a reference frame, particularly when the body is not symmetric.
  • Another participant explains that the components of the inertia tensor can change over time if the mass distribution of the body changes relative to fixed coordinate axes.
  • It is noted that if a body-fixed coordinate system is used, the inertia tensor components remain time-independent.
  • Some participants discuss the use of spherical coordinates to describe the orientation of a rigid body and how this affects the inertia tensor's representation.
  • A general question is raised about the applicability of the inertia tensor to non-rigid systems, with some suggesting it may be useful under certain conditions, while others express skepticism about its relevance outside rigid body dynamics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the inertia tensor and the reference frame, particularly regarding its dependence on the body's position and orientation. There is no consensus on the applicability of the inertia tensor to non-rigid systems, with some participants suggesting it may be relevant in specific contexts while others disagree.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that the inertia tensor's components can vary based on the chosen coordinate system and the body's orientation. The discussion also touches on the limitations of applying the inertia tensor concept to non-rigid systems, indicating that its utility may be restricted to rigid body dynamics.

  • #31
cianfa72 said:
In the context of Newtonian physics I believe there is no gain from the bi-vector language/definition.
This is probably true for textbook problems, where simple systems are meant to be solved by hand. But this assessment might change in the context of automated computation of more complex systems, which have a lot of symmetry, like some robots or animated characters. Here, you often have to mirror the mechanics from one side to the other. And not having to keep track which vectors are pseudo-vectors, and thus have to be negated after mirroring, might simplify the code.

Think about how quaternions where replaced in physics by vector analysis in the late 19th century, but then had a comeback in the late 20th century in computer graphics and robotics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion#History
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
856
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K