Can someone clarify and shed some light about these two statements

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jrist29
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the apparent contradiction between two statements regarding the dependence of measurements in physics on coordinate systems. It explores concepts from relativity, vector representation, and tensor analysis, focusing on how these ideas relate to the interpretation of measurements by different observers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Post 1 presents a perceived contradiction between two statements about measurements in physics: one suggesting that measurements depend on the coordinate system, and the other asserting that they are invariant under transformation laws.
  • Post 2 clarifies that the first statement refers to the components of vectors and tensors, which change with the coordinate system, while the second statement pertains to the vectors themselves, which remain invariant regardless of the frame of reference.
  • Post 3 expresses appreciation for the clarification provided, indicating a need for better understanding of the distinction between vectors and their representations in different coordinate systems.
  • Post 4 provides a simple example of how a vector's representation changes with a rotated coordinate system while maintaining its invariant length.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the distinction between vector components and the vectors themselves, but the initial contradiction raised in Post 1 remains a point of contention without a definitive resolution.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of understanding how measurements are affected by coordinate systems and the nuances involved in vector representation, which may not have been fully addressed in earlier learning experiences.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals studying physics, particularly those interested in relativity, vector analysis, and the implications of coordinate transformations in measurements.

jrist29
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
If every dynamic variable in a physics problem is a measurement derived from a particular coordinate system how do you explain the contradiction both statements 1 and 2 imply if they are both simultaneously true:

1. According to relativity (relative velocity etc.) every measurement of position, distance, displacement, velocity and acceleration is dependent on the particular coordinate system used to make the measurements and by that logic every observer should get a different measurement based on the particular coordinate system used (i.e. placement of origin and orientation of axes)
2. According to transformation laws and tensor analysis vectors and scalars are covariant or form invariant and therefore measurements do not depend on the particular coordinate system used and by that logic every observer should get the same measurement regardless of their particular frame of reference
Unless I have grossly misunderstood physics and how we acquire information about the world (which is more than likely the case) there seems to be a major contradiction here. Correct me if I am wrong please because I do not see a way out of this conundrum!
 
Science news on Phys.org
What 1 refers to are the components of vectors and tensors as reckoned from various coordinate systems. As you know, the vectors themselves can be expressed as the sum of their components times the unit vectors in the coordinate directions. If you change frame of reference (coordinate system), you change the unit vectors, and, that causes the vector components to change. But the sum of the components times the unit vectors remains the same.

Item 2 refers to the vectors themselves (not their components). Of course, the vectors themselves do not change when you change frame of reference.
 
Thanks Chestmiller! I have taken quite a few physics courses and the all the information starts to blur after awhile if I don't keep the concepts straight lol! I guess I need to practice more problems! But you hit the nail on the head by clarifying the distinctions between the actual vector and the vector representation in a particular coordinate system. I guess as I was learning physics that concept was not made clear enough to me or I didnt give it the attention it deserved.

Thanks a million
jrist29
 
As a very very simple example, If I set up a Cartesian coordinate system in a plane, the vector from the origin, (0, 0), to the point (1, 1) is, of course, [itex]\vec{i}+ \vec{j}[/tex]. If I rotate that coordinate system so that my new x-axis was pointing along the line y= x (in the original coordinate system) then that <b>same<b> vector would be represented by [itex]\sqrt{2}\vec{i'}[/itex] where, now, [itex]\vec{i'}[/itex] is the unit vector along the <b>new</b> x-axis. The components have changed, but it is still the same vector. (And, in either coordinate system, it <b>length</b> is "invariant".)</b></b>[/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K