Derivative of Unit Vector in a Rotating Frame

12 replies · 36K views · last reply
Jhenrique
Messages
676
Reaction score
4
Before anyone thinks I didn't numerous attempts before opening this topic, take a look at my rough draft of mathematics in the annex.

So, a simple question. How derivate an unit vector wrt any variable? I can derivate any unit vector wrt θ or φ, obivious, but how derivate the vector φ wrt to x, for example? What is the rule? What is formula? I already searched and I not found.
 
Attachments
  • Photo of many loose sheets of ruled paper with handwritten mathematical working spread across a desk, with a pen and a computer mouse nearby.
    Imagem000.jpg
    21.5 KB · Views: 1,528
  • Photo of many loose sheets of handwritten calculations spread across a tiled floor and a desk, with dense rows of handwritten equations and tables on lined paper.
    Imagem001.jpg
    20.4 KB · Views: 1,575
Last edited by a moderator:
see as the calculation of a derivative of an unit vector is doubtful:

from http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalCoordinates.html follows that:
[tex]\frac{d\hat{r}}{dr}=\vec{0}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{d\hat{r}}{d\phi}=\vec{\phi}[/tex]
by chain rule
[tex]\frac{d\hat{r}}{d\phi}=\frac{d\hat{r}}{dr}\frac{dr}{d\phi}[/tex]
[tex]\vec{\phi}=\vec{0} \frac{dr}{d\phi}[/tex]
what is an absurd!
The vec ##\vec{\phi}## isn't zero. If I can't believe in the chain rule thus I will believe in what!?
 
None of that is correct. The Wolfram page says $$\frac{\partial\hat r}{\partial r} = \vec 0$$ not $$\frac{d\hat r}{dr} = \vec 0.$$
 
AlephZero said:
None of that is correct. The Wolfram page says $$\frac{\partial\hat r}{\partial r} = \vec 0$$ not $$\frac{d\hat r}{dr} = \vec 0.$$

OH GOD!

which the difference between take the partial derivative versus the total derivative of an unit vector?
 
You have to think about the quantity you are differentiating and what it is a function of:

[tex]\hat r(\phi, θ) = (sin \phi cosθ, sin \phi sinθ, cos \phi)[/tex]

So, it's not a function of r at all. Hence: $$\frac{\partial\hat r}{\partial r} = 0$$

And, it is a function of two variables. So, the derivatives wrt θ and ø will be partial.

Until you get used to multivariables, perhaps it's best to put them in each time you are differentiating. So, always write:

[tex]\hat r(\phi, θ)[/tex]
So that you know it's a function of two variables.
 
By wolfram page (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CylindricalCoordinates.html)

I can derivate the unit vector r by the christoffel's symbols and the derivative will be:

##\frac{\partial \hat{r}}{\partial \theta}=\frac{1}{r}\hat{\theta}##

or by the identity that exist in the page:

##\frac{\partial \hat{r}}{\partial \theta}=\hat{\theta}##

And this is more thing that makes me angry, and without understand why these equations do not coincide.
 
Jhenrique said:
I can derivate the unit vector r by the christoffel's symbols and the derivative will be:

##\frac{\partial \hat{r}}{\partial \theta}=\frac{1}{r}\hat{\theta}##

or by the identity that exist in the page:

##\frac{\partial \hat{r}}{\partial \theta}=\hat{\theta}##

The second equation is correct. I don't know how you got the first equation. Instead, we have:
[tex]\vec r = r \hat r[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\partial{\vec r}}{\partial θ} = r \frac{\partial{\hat r}}{\partial θ} = r \hat θ[/tex]

So: [tex]\hat θ = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial{\vec r}}{\partial θ}[/tex]
 
look this

Scanned page from a vector textbook showing Figure 5.1, annotated Christoffel symbol Γ with index labels, and Figure 5.2, Γ^r_rθ = 0 and Γ^θ_rθ = 1/r with explanatory callouts, followed by the equation ∂e_r/∂θ = 0e_r + (1/r)e_θ.


The last equation in book is wrong?
 
Are you sure that relates to the cylindrical co-ordinate system?
 
Last edited:
Jhenrique said:
The last equation in book is wrong?

Nothing in your image says that page of the book is about spherical coordinates. The fact that it only talks about two unit vectors and two Christoffel symbols, not three, suggests to me that it is about something else.

This is a simple way to get the right answers, without tying yourself in knots with fancy notation.
http://www.csupomona.edu/~ajm/materials/delsph.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would say that unless it's addressing some rather weird coordinate system (ellipsoidal, maybe?), it's wrong. If it's addressing either spherical or cylindrical coordinates, it's wrong.
 
But the coordinate system chosen by the author no matter because the factor 1/r no appears in any derivative of unit vector in cylindrical or spherical system. Conclusion, the book is wrong...!?...

Table of partial derivatives of unit vectors r-hat, theta-hat, phi-hat and z-hat with respect to r, theta, phi and z, in spherical and cylindrical coordinates, e.g. ∂r-hat/∂θ = θ-hat, ∂φ-hat/∂φ = -r-hat.


PS: however, the factor 1/r appears a lot of times in wolfram page...
Two matrix displays of Christoffel symbols of the second kind in polar coordinates: Gamma^r has entry -r at the middle position, Gamma^theta has entries 1/r, Gamma^z is zero; the second display lists -r and 1/r with the 1/r entry in a different position.


I don't know what is correct or wrong wrt to this christoffel's symbols...
 
Last edited: