Cartesian Tensors and transformation matrix

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation matrix in the context of Cartesian tensors, specifically how it relates to basic vectors and the derivation of the transformation equations. Participants are exploring the mathematical relationships and properties involved in these transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Howard expresses confusion regarding the derivation of the transformation matrix as a function of basic vectors and requests clarification.
  • One participant states that the transformation matrix elements can be expressed as the cosine of the angle between the basis vectors, represented as the dot product of the vectors.
  • Another participant references specific pages from a textbook, outlining the relationship between the transformation matrix and the basis vectors, and notes that the transformation matrix is orthogonal due to the rigid nature of rotations.
  • There is mention of the inverse of the transformation matrix and its properties, including the identity relationship involving Kronecker delta.
  • A further contribution discusses the application of matrix operations and the implications of starting from the transformation matrix definition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants are exploring different aspects of the transformation matrix, but there is no consensus on the derivation or clarity of the relationships involved. Multiple viewpoints and methods of explanation are presented without resolution.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the properties of orthogonal matrices and the application of dot products, but these assumptions are not universally agreed upon or fully explored.

Hacky
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I was just reading chapter on Cartesian tensors and came across equation for transformation matrix as function of basic vectors. I just do not get it and cannot find a derivation. I am too old to learn Latex, I uploaded a word document with the equation. Thanks, Howard
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Howard,

Lij=cos(e'i,ej)=e'i dot ej.
 
I am looking at page 930-931 Of Riley, Hobson, Bence.

They go from:

e'j,= Sij ei

X'i = (S[tex]^{-1}[/tex])ij Xj

Define L as inverse of matrix S

X'i = Lij Xj, since rotations of coordinate axes are rigid, transformation matrix L is orthogonal, thus the inverse transformation is

Xi = Lji X'j and

Lik Ljk = [tex]\delta[/tex]ij and Lki Lkj = [tex]\delta[/tex]ij

"furthermore, in terms of basis vectors of the primed and unprimed Cartesian coordinate system, the transformation matrix is given by

Lij = e'i dot ej

I understand the cosine formula for dot product but do not see how the transformation matrix follows from this argument. I am starting to get the Latex, but all the i's and j's are of course subscripts.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
using x'ie'i=xjej ; If you start from e'j,= Sij ei, then Sij is some matrix which is defined.x'je'j=xiei or x'jSij ei=xiei ,i.e. Sij x'j=xi, i.e.x'j=[Sinverse]jixi , noting how matrix operation is applicable[again e.g.by dotting by dotting e'k for both sides then you get x'k=xjLkj]...

Some property Lki Lkj = delij, should be remembered once for all.Then you can get everything else.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K