1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Coordinates transformation

  1. Aug 26, 2012 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    The x-y coordinates are being transformed into the u-v coordinates.

    Based on the diagram, u lies along x while v makes an angle α with x.


    3. The attempt at a solution

    The answer defined u and v weirdly..

    Shouldn't

    x = u

    and

    y = v sin α

    ??
     

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 26, 2012 #2

    gabbagabbahey

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    No. Consider the position vector [itex]\mathbf{r}= x\mathbf{e}_x + y\mathbf{e}_y = u\mathbf{e}_u + v\mathbf{e}_v[/itex]:

    You have [itex]\mathbf{e}_u = \mathbf{e}_x[/itex] since the two axes are parallel, but [itex]\mathbf{e}_v[/itex] has both a vertical and a horizontal component and is given by [itex]\mathbf{e}_v = \cos\alpha \mathbf{e}_x + \sin\alpha \mathbf{e}_y[/itex]. Plugging this into the position vector definition gives [itex]x\mathbf{e}_x + y\mathbf{e}_y= u \mathbf{e}_x + v( \cos\alpha \mathbf{e}_x + \sin\alpha \mathbf{e}_y)[/itex], which gives you the relations in your image.
     
  4. Aug 26, 2012 #3
    Also, does the region of integration R change if we change the variables from (x,y) to (u,v)?


    According to the answer, the region R → R', where R' is only σ/2∏ of the original R..
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Aug 26, 2012 #4

    gabbagabbahey

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    No, that's not what they are saying. Read it again more carefully, what they are actually claiming is that [itex]\int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-r^2} \left| \frac{\partial(x,y)}{\partial(u,v)} \right|dudv = \frac{\alpha}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-r^2}dxdy[/itex]

    The integral on the left is only over positive [itex]u[/itex] & [itex]y[/itex], while the integral on the right is over all (R2) space.
     
  6. Aug 26, 2012 #5
    Yup, if you only consider x,y,u,v > 0,

    it would be α/(∏/2) for ∫ 0 to infinity..
     
  7. Aug 26, 2012 #6
    I dont really understand what you mean...

    My main problem here is why do they define u and v as such in the picture?

    I thought u and v are defined when you drop a perpendicular line onto the axis?

    And it's pretty clear that the lengths u, v they define are shorter than the ones in my picture..
     
  8. Aug 26, 2012 #7
    That's the case when your coordinate lines are perpendicular. When they are not, you get what you see in this picture.
     
  9. Aug 26, 2012 #8
    Are they defined this way?
     
  10. Aug 26, 2012 #9
    A coordinate system (on an plane) is defined by its origin and unit vectors [itex]\vec{a}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{b}[/itex]. Any point [itex]\vec{p} = u\vec{a} + v\vec{b}[/itex]. [itex]u[/itex] and [itex]v[/itex] are coordinates. Now if the coordinate unit vectors are not perpendicular, what do you get? Try it on a piece of paper.
     
  11. Aug 26, 2012 #10
    Ah, using vectors everything seems much simpler now! Thank you! :smile:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook