Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Deriving angular velocity vector algebra?

  1. Mar 16, 2010 #1
    where x represents cross product

    currently if i forget i figure these out using the right hand rule, but how do you get each equation visa versa using vector algebra

    i started with w = rxv

    how do you derive that v = wxr

    i got up to this

    w = rxv
    w= -(vxr)
    rxw = -rx(vxr)
    rxw = v(r.r) - r(r.v)
    rxw= v -r(r.v)

    but can u assume r.v are perpendicular?
    is this the right approach? and you even relate the 2 equations this way??
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 16, 2010 #2

    jav

    User Avatar

    This is not true in general.

    We know that w=rxv mus be orthogonal to both r and v by definition.

    If v=wxr, then v would be orthogonal to both w and r. We know v is orthogonal to w by hypothesis, but v is not necessarily orthogonal to r.

    Bottom line, you would have to assume orthogonality of r and v to make any kind of assertion like this.
     
  4. May 10, 2010 #3
    You were wrong from the start I'm afraid.

    For v_t is tangential velocity (theta_hat component)

    w=v_t/r
    v_t=|v_t|=|rhat x v|
    sometimes but not always more useful:
    rhat=r/r and
    v_t=|(r/r) x v|
    in vector form then:
    w= (rhat/r) x v=(r/r^2) x v

    then
    wr= rhat x v

    in absolute value this is:
    wr=v_t

    Of course in absolute value you could have just skipped all the vector stuff,
    so presumably it is the vector result that you are interested in.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2010
  5. May 11, 2010 #4
    BTW it is true that:
    wxr=v_t
    where v_t=v_t theta_that=rhatxv

    Since all three are now orthogonal , proof of that comes from unit vector cross product rules, basically the right hand rule anyway, except it will work for a right or left handed rule since w depends in the first place on which rule you're using. That's why if one side of an equal is an axial vector, the other side also should also , and also why, as in the case here, an axial vector crossed with a vector, is a vector. The result of that cross product doesn't depend on the rule.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Deriving angular velocity vector algebra?
  1. Derivative of vectors? (Replies: 1)

  2. Vector algebra (Replies: 1)

  3. Derivative of a vector (Replies: 11)

Loading...