Classical Mechanics - Tranformations

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around transformations in classical mechanics, specifically focusing on how position vectors, momenta, and forces change when transitioning to a uniformly moving frame of reference. The original poster presents a transformation equation and seeks clarification on the implications for relative position vectors and the associated physical quantities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the transformation of relative position vectors and question how momenta and forces are affected. There is an attempt to derive expressions for transformed quantities and clarify the meaning of relative versus absolute velocities.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights on simplifying expressions and have pointed out potential misunderstandings regarding the transformation of quantities. There is ongoing exploration of the implications of the transformations on momenta and forces, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note confusion regarding the definitions of certain variables and the implications of relative versus absolute velocities in the context of the problem. The original poster also expresses difficulty with notation related to unit vectors.

teme92
Messages
185
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Consider a transformation to a relatively uniformly moving frame of reference, where each position vector ri is replaced by rli = ri − vt. (Here v is a constant, the relative velocity of the two frames.) How does a relative position vector rij transform? How do momenta and forces transform? Show explicitly that if equations (1.1) to (1.4) hold in the original frame, then they also hold in the new one.

Homework Equations



(1.1) pli = miai = Fi

(1.2) Fi = Fi1 + Fi2 + · · · + FiN = ∑Fij

(1.3) Fji = -Fij

(1.4) Fij = r^ijf(rij)

The r^ is supposed to be the unit vector but I can't get r hat to work.
p=mv
F=ma

The Attempt at a Solution



So I said rij = ri - rj

As rli = ri − vt, rearranged and got ri on its own and then subbed into rij = ri - rj, giving:

rij = rli - rj +vt

I'm confused about the next part.

v is relative velocity so: v = vi - vj

What does this mean for the momenta and the forces? Any help would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
teme92 said:
The r^ is supposed to be the unit vector but I can't get r hat to work.
##\hat{r}#[/color]# -> ##\hat{r}##

So I said rij = ri - rj
Fine so far.
Now the question asks you to find r'ij.

rij = rli - rj +vt
That statement is true, but not helpful - it mixes coordinates from one frame with coordinates from the other frame.

v is relative velocity
No, you can (and should) look at the absolute velocity in this frame. The position is the only part of the question where relative quantities are looked at.
 
Hey mfb thanks for the help.

So r'ij = r'i - r'j?
 
= ... ?

Can you express that in terms of the old rij?
 
r'ij = r'i - r'j = ri - vt -(rj - vt)

I'm not sure about the r'j as it doesn't specifically say what it is in the question.
 
i or j as index does not matter, that is just an arbitrary letter.
You can simplify the right side now. The answer will get really short.
 
So vt cancels and I'm left with:

r'ij = ri - rj

which is the same as rij. So there's no change?
 
So does this mean there is no change in the momenta or forces also then?
 
  • #10
What are the equations that brought you to this conclusion? Guessing does not count.
 
  • #11
Well p=mv: m is constant and seeing as r doesn't change the derivative which is velocity will be the same.

F=ma: once again m is constant and a is the second derivative of r, so there should be no change
 
  • #12
r (the position coordinate) does change, you directly see this in the problem statement.
What you calculated before was the relative position of two objects.
 
  • #13
Ok so going on pi = mivi

v'i= vi - v

but v = vi - vj

so v'i= vi - (vi - vj)

v'i = vj

so p=mvj

Is this correct? And if it is do I just differentiate again to get acceleration for F=ma?
 
  • #14
teme92 said:
but v = vi - vj
What is vj?

And where is p'?

And if it is do I just differentiate again to get acceleration for F=ma?
That will work, but you have to find the correct p' first.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K