Contravariant Vector Transformation in Spherical Polar Coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the transformation of contravariant vectors in spherical polar coordinates, particularly focusing on the relationship between vector components in spherical coordinates and their Cartesian counterparts. Participants explore the nature of position vectors and their transformation properties, as well as the implications of these transformations in different coordinate systems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a transformation of a contravariant vector in spherical coordinates and questions whether they are missing something in their calculations.
  • Another participant expresses difficulty in understanding the original post, particularly regarding the notation and the components of the position vector.
  • There is a contention about whether the position vector can be considered a contravariant vector, with some arguing it is not a vector due to its nonlinear transformation properties.
  • Some participants clarify that in an affine space, a position vector can exist and transform covariantly, but its components are not necessarily the coordinates themselves.
  • Participants discuss the ambiguity in the term "position vector," distinguishing between true vectors and coordinate tuples, especially in different coordinate systems.
  • One participant suggests that the tangent vector to a curve may transform contravariantly, prompting further inquiry into the nature of position vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the classification of position vectors and their transformation properties. There is no consensus on whether the position vector should be considered a contravariant vector, and the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity in definitions and notation, particularly regarding the transformation rules for position vectors and their components. The discussion reveals limitations in understanding the relationship between different types of vectors in various coordinate systems.

Apashanka
Messages
427
Reaction score
15
In a spherical polar coordinate system if the components of a vector given be (r,θ,φ)=1,2,3 respectively. Then the component of the vector along the x-direction of a cartesian coordinate system is $$rsinθcosφ$$.
But from the transformation of contravariant vector $$A^{-i}=\frac{∂x^{-i}}{∂x^j}A^j$$ where $$A^1=1 ,A^2=2 ,A^3=3$$ from this transformation if $$x^{-1}=x$$ of the cartesian coordinate system then $$A^{-1}=sin\theta cos\phi+2rcos\theta cos\phi-3rsin\theta sin\phi$$(component along x of cartesian coordinate system)
Am I missing out something??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am sorry, but it is completely impossible to parse what you are trying to say here. The x-component of the position vector expressed in polar coordinates is ##x = r\sin(\theta)\cos(\varphi)##. The vector components of A that you are writing down are not the components of the position vector. It is also impossible to know what you are referring to with ##x^{-1}##. Are you intending to write ##\bar x^1##?
 
Orodruin said:
Are you intending to write ¯x1x¯1\bar x^1?
Yes sir that is...
 
Orodruin said:
The vector components of A that you are writing down are not the components of the position vector.
But sir position is a contravariant vector
 
Apashanka said:
But sir position is a contravariant vector
So what? You have chosen the conponents to be particular values that do not agree with the components of the position vector apart from in a single point.
 
Apashanka said:
But sir position is a contravariant vector

Position is actually NOT a vector at all. Vectors transform linearly under coordinate transformations, while a position "vector" can transform nonlinearly.
 
stevendaryl said:
Position is actually NOT a vector at all. Vectors transform linearly under coordinate transformations, while a position "vector" can transform nonlinearly.
Well, the OP is dealing with spherical coordinates on ##\mathbb R^3##, which is an affine space and therefore has a position vector field (i.e., the vector field that at each point takes the value of the translation vector from the origin). What is important to note is that this position vector not necessarily has the coordinates ##x^i## as its components.
 
Apashanka said:
But sir position is a contravariant vector
Can you show this explicitly by the transformation rules? Do the components of a position 'vector' transform covariantly?

Hint: they do not. Hence my '...'.
 
haushofer said:
Can you show this explicitly by the transformation rules? Do the components of a position 'vector' transform covariantly?

Hint: they do not. Hence my '...'.
In order for a position vector to exist, the space must be affine. Such a position vector does have components that transform covariantly. Those components are not the coordinates themselves, see #7.

Example: The ##\mathbb R^3## position vector is given by ##r\vec e_r## in spherical coordinates. This is a perfectly fine vector field.
 
  • #10
Apashanka said:
In a spherical polar coordinate system if the components of a vector given be (r,θ,φ)=1,2,3 respectively. Then the component of the vector along the x-direction of a cartesian coordinate system is $$rsinθcosφ$$.
But from the transformation of contravariant vector $$A^{-i}=\frac{∂x^{-i}}{∂x^j}A^j$$ where $$A^1=1 ,A^2=2 ,A^3=3$$ from this transformation if $$x^{-1}=x$$ of the cartesian coordinate system then $$A^{-1}=sin\theta cos\phi+2rcos\theta cos\phi-3rsin\theta sin\phi$$(component along x of cartesian coordinate system)
Am I missing out something??
Is it therefore the tangent vector to a curve which is contravariant transform this way...??
 
  • #11
I am sorry, it is still completely impossible to parse what you are asking because what you are asking.
 
  • #12
Orodruin said:
In order for a position vector to exist, the space must be affine. Such a position vector does have components that transform covariantly. Those components are not the coordinates themselves, see #7.

Example: The ##\mathbb R^3## position vector is given by ##r\vec e_r## in spherical coordinates. This is a perfectly fine vector field.

Okay. My comment was really about an ambiguity about what "position vector" means. You're right, that in a flat spacetime (or more generally, an affine space, I guess---does that just mean that there is a path-independent notion of parallel-transport?) you can associate a position with the vector "pointing" from the origin to the position. This is a true vector. But sometimes people sloppily talk about the n-tuple of coordinates ##(x^1, x^2, ..., x^n)## as a "position vector". The former is a true vector (assuming parallel transport is path-independent), while the latter isn't. In the special case of Cartesian coordinates in flat spacetime, the two types of n-tuples (components of the position vector and n-tuple of the coordinates) coincide.
 
  • #13
That was also my intent, Stevendaryl ;)
 
  • #14
Of course I agree that ##x^i \vec E_i## does not generally describe a coordinate independent vector field. It is of course possible to have a vector field that takes this form in a particular set of coordinates (e.g., the position vector in Cartesian coordinates), but the field will not be expressed like this in an arbitrary coordinate system.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K