Building a rotational matrix transformation

Click For Summary
Building a rotational transformation matrix for both counterclockwise and clockwise angles involves understanding the relationship between sine and cosine functions. The counterclockwise rotation matrix is given by [cos(θ), -sin(θ); sin(θ), cos(θ)], while the clockwise rotation can be derived by replacing θ with -θ, resulting in [cos(θ), sin(θ); -sin(θ), cos(θ)]. The key distinction lies in the properties of sine and cosine, where cosine is even and sine is odd. This means that the clockwise rotation matrix is essentially the transpose of the counterclockwise matrix. Verifying the multiplication of these matrices will confirm that they return to the identity matrix, illustrating their equivalence.
adrs
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am trying to build a rotational transformation matrix both for counterclockwise and clockwise angles.

The first matrix in the picture is for counterclockwise angles and the second one for clockwise angles. The first matrix I built corresponds to the one given in my linear algebra book so it seems the building process's OK.
However, in my book there isn't one for clockwise angles and that's why I've built one. I've been searching on the Internet and it seems that the rotational matrix for clockwise angles is the same as the one for counterclokwise ones but with the sines with opposite signs.
Nevertheless, that's not the one I've obtained If I thry for example with a 24.78 clokwise angle.

So, where does my reasoning fail? Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • escanear0001.jpg
    escanear0001.jpg
    23.8 KB · Views: 539
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't really need different matrices for "clockwise" and "counterclockwise" rotattions because rotation "clockwise" is just the same as rotation counterclockwise but with negative angle.

Rotation through angle \theta, counterclockwise, is given, as you say, by the matrix
\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & -sin(\theta) \\ sin(\theta) & cos(\theta) \end{bmatrix}

so that rotation through the same angle, clockwise is the same thing with \theta replaced by -\theta:
\begin{bmatrix}cos(-\theta) & -sin(-\theta) \\ sin(-\theta) & cos(-\theta) \end{bmatrix}

Perhaps what you are missing is that cosine is an even function and sine is an odd function: cos(-\theta)= cos(\theta) and sin(-\theta)= -sin(\theta) so that the previous matrix is just
\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & sin(\theta) \\ -sin(\theta) & cos(\theta) \end{bmatrix}
the "transpose" of the counterclockwise rotation.

Of course, rotating cockwise by a given angle and then counterclockwise by the same angle, or vice-versa, gets you right back to where you were before so a good exercise is to do the two multiplications
\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & -sin(\theta) \\ sin(\theta) & cos(\theta) \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & sin(\theta) \\ -sin(\theta) & cos(\theta)\end{bmatrix}
and
\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & sin(\theta) \\ -sin(\theta) & cos(\theta) \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}cos(\theta) & -sin(\theta) \\ sin(\theta) & cos(\theta)\end{bmatrix}
and show that they both give the identity matrix.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K