Derivative of unit vector in spherical coords.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivatives of unit vectors in spherical coordinates, specifically focusing on the expressions for the differentials of the unit vectors \( \hat{r} \), \( \hat{\theta} \), and \( \hat{\phi} \). The original poster presents a series of equations and conditions related to the torsion and metric compatibility in the context of differential geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive the expressions for \( d \hat{r} \), \( d \hat{\theta} \), and \( d \hat{\phi} \) using differential forms and torsion conditions. Some participants question the correctness of the expressions provided, suggesting that terms involving \( \hat{r} \) may be missing. Others reflect on the implications of treating \( r \) as a constant in previous calculations and how that might affect the current problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing feedback on the original poster's attempts and raising questions about the assumptions made. There is an exploration of the relationship between the current problem and previous work on polar coordinates, indicating a productive exchange of ideas without a clear consensus yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of considering the nature of the spherical coordinates and the implications of treating \( r \) as constant in certain contexts. There is also mention of the torsion conditions and metric compatibility, which are central to the discussion.

WendysRules
Messages
35
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Given ## d \vec r = dr \hat r + r d \theta \hat {\theta} + r \sin \theta d \phi \hat {\phi}.## Find ## d \hat r , d \hat {\theta} , d \hat {\phi}. ##

Homework Equations


I know that ## d \hat {e_j} = \omega^i_j \hat {e_i} ## and that ## \omega_{ij}=- \omega_{ji} ## and ## 0 = d \sigma^i + \omega^i_j \wedge \sigma^j ## and ##d^2(r) = 0 ## and lastly, ## \omega_{ij}= \hat e_i \cdot d \hat e_j##

The Attempt at a Solution


Putting answers up here, as my work is below:[/B]
## d \hat r = d \theta \hat \theta + sin\theta d\phi \hat \phi##
## d\hat \theta = -d\theta \hat r - cos \theta d \phi \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \phi = -sin\theta d\phi \hat r + cos \theta d \phi \hat \theta ##
Which looks... wrong?

Using the above, we can get:
## d \hat r = \omega^r_r \hat r + \omega^\theta_r \hat \theta + \omega^\phi_r \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \theta = \omega^r_\theta \hat r + \omega^\theta_\theta \hat \theta + \omega^\phi_\theta \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \phi = \omega^r_\phi \hat r + \omega^\theta_\phi \hat \theta + \omega^\phi_\phi \hat \phi ##
We also must use our torsion condition thus... we get:
## 0 = d(dr) + \omega^r_r \wedge dr + \omega^r_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^r_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##
## 0 = d( r d \theta) + \omega^\theta_r \wedge dr + \omega^\theta_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^\theta_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##
## 0 = d ( r sin\theta d \phi) + \omega^\phi_r \wedge dr + \omega^\phi_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^\phi_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##

Expanding out our derivatives, we get:
## 0 = 0 + \omega^r_r \wedge dr + \omega^r_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^r_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##
## 0 = dr \wedge d \theta + \omega^\theta_r \wedge dr + \omega^\theta_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^\theta_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##
## 0 = sin\theta dr \wedge d \phi + rcos\theta d \theta \wedge d \phi + \omega^\phi_r \wedge dr + \omega^\phi_\theta \wedge r d \theta + \omega^\phi_\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ##

Solving our first equation, I see that ##\omega^r_r= 0, \omega^r_\theta = a d \theta, \omega^r_\phi = b d\phi##, and using our metric compatibility, we know that ## \omega^\theta_r= - a d \theta , \omega^\phi_r = - bd\phi## where a, b are unknowns so far.
From second torsion condition, I see that ##\omega^\theta_\theta = 0 , \omega^\theta_\phi = cd\phi## which forces ## \omega^\phi_\theta = - cd\phi## where c is an unknown. For my 3rd torsion condition, I see that ##\omega^\phi_\phi = 0 ## Thus, plugging these into my torsion condition I see...
The first one turns into:
## 0 = 0 + a d \theta \wedge r d \theta + b d\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ## which does equal 0 for any value of a, b.
The second one turns into:
## 0 = dr \wedge d \theta + - a d \theta \wedge dr + 0 + cd\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ## which only works if a=-1, but will work for any value of c. (For why, a=-1 works, notice that if I flip my basis, I get ## 0 = dr \wedge d \theta + (- a) - dr \wedge d\theta + 0 + cd\phi \wedge r \sin \theta d \phi ## which will only make the ## dr \wedge d \theta ## vanish if a = -1. )
The third one turns into:
## 0 = sin\theta dr \wedge d \phi + rcos\theta d \theta \wedge d \phi + - bd\phi \wedge dr + - cd\phi \wedge r d \theta + 0 ## where only if ## b = -sin\theta and c=-cos\theta ## will satisfy this condition. To see why, we notice that ## 0 = sin\theta dr \wedge d \phi + rcos\theta d \theta \wedge d \phi + - (-sin) d\phi \wedge dr + -(cos)d\phi \wedge r d \theta ## which becomes ## 0 = sin\theta dr \wedge d \phi + rcos\theta d \theta \wedge d \phi -sin\theta dr \wedge d \phi + r(cos\theta)d \theta \wedge d \phi## which causes all of our terms to vanish, woo.

However, when plugging this back to get my derivatives of my unit vectors, I get:
## d \hat r = d\theta \hat \theta + sin\theta d\theta \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \theta = -d\theta \hat r + cos\theta d\theta \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \phi = -sin\theta \hat r + -cos\theta \hat \theta ##
Which looks... wrong? I don't think this is right, maybe there isn't a sum over the i's? But then if I use the fact that ##\omega_{ij}=-\omega_{ji} ## I see that ##\omega_{12} = -d \theta## and ##\omega_{21}= d\theta##, ##\omega_{13} = -sin\theta d \phi## and ##\omega_{31} = sin\theta d\phi## ##\omega_{23}=cos\theta d\phi## and ##\omega_{32} = -cos\theta d\phi## which confirms metric compatibility, since for all i,j did ##\omega_{ij}=- \omega_{ji}## (can provide work if needed, this post is getting long!)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you think it is wrong? Apart from the fact that you have missed the differentials in the last expression and only used ##d\theta## everywhere for the others.
 
Orodruin said:
Why do you think it is wrong? Apart from the fact that you have missed the differentials in the last expression and only used ##d\theta## everywhere for the others.
Oops haha, I got lazy and copy and pasted wrong terms since the post got long. On paper I have:
## d \hat r = d \theta \hat \theta + sin\theta d\phi \hat \phi##
## d\hat \theta = -d\theta \hat r - cos \theta d \phi \hat \phi ##
## d \hat \phi = -sin\theta d\phi \hat r + cos \theta d \phi \hat \theta ## I'll edit this into my first post.

EDIT: Just realized that I'm not talking about curvature.

I guess it should make sense given that these are only my *first* derivatives, so my ## d(\hat r) ## should'nt vanish
 
You must have terms involving ##\hat r##. Compare with the case of polar coordinates in the plane.
 
Orodruin said:
You must have terms involving ##\hat r##. Compare with the case of polar coordinates in the plane.
Okay, I think i found my confusion after I woke up this morning. The problem I did before this had us basically compute the same things, however, our line element was ##ds^2=r^2d \theta^2 + r^2sin^2 \theta d \phi^2 ## which would be a 2d sphere with a basis ## {rd\theta, rsin\theta d\phi}## in this scenario, I took it as saying r=constant, and when i expanded my derivatives in my torsion condition, they vanished i.e ## d(r d\theta) = dr \wedge d\theta + r d^2 \theta = 0+0## because dr=0 since r=const. Since it was late, I expected that for my 3d sphere which wouldn't be right.

However, now I am not sure if taking r to be const. on my 2d sphere is the way to go... (sorry for any typos in latex, am on phone)
 
I think I've convinced myself that r=const for sure, and that my calculations are correct. When we look at our ## \Omega_{ij} = d\omega_{ij} + \omega_{ik} \wedge \omega_{kj} ## from our 3sphere and 2sphere, i noticed that on the 3sphere that ## \Omega_{\theta \phi} = -2sin\theta d\theta \wedge d \phi## and that ##\Omega_{\phi \theta} = 2 sin\theta d \theta \wedge d \phi ## and on the 2 sphere, theyre the same just without the factor of 2! Thus, it makes sense that the curvature would basically be the same since the underlying geometry would be the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K