Describing a position vector with polar coordinates.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of position vectors in polar coordinates, comparing it to Cartesian coordinates. Participants explore how to express position, velocity, and acceleration in polar coordinates, and the necessity of angular components in this representation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the position vector in polar coordinates is given by ##\vec{r} = |r| \hat{r}##, but question how this representation maps to any point in the plane without an angular description.
  • Others propose that a position vector can be represented as a sum of radial and angular components, but note that the resultant vector remains a radial vector, suggesting the angular component may be unnecessary.
  • It is noted that specifying only the radial component 'r' does not provide a complete description, similar to only specifying 'x' or 'y' in Cartesian coordinates.
  • Some participants emphasize that the basis vectors ##\hat{r}## and ##\hat{\theta}## in polar coordinates are functions of both ##r## and ##\theta##, suggesting that clarity could be improved by denoting this dependency explicitly.
  • A later reply agrees with the clarification about the basis vectors, adding that they are functions only of ##\theta## and not ##r##.
  • Participants seek to understand how to express vectors in polar coordinates and inquire about the angle and magnitude of specific Cartesian vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of angular components in the representation of position vectors in polar coordinates. There is no consensus on whether the angular component is superfluous or essential for a complete description.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding the relationship between the radial and angular components in polar coordinates, but do not resolve the implications of this relationship on the completeness of the position vector representation.

Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44
I have read that in polar coordinates, we can form the position vector, velocity, and acceleration, just as with Cartesian coordinates. The position vector in Cartesian coordinates is ##\vec{r} = r_x \hat{i} + r_y \hat{j}##. And any choice of ##r_x## and ##r_y## maps the vector to a position in the plane. How is this done with polar coordinates? Online I have read that the position vector in polar coordinates is ##\vec{r} = |r| \hat{r}##, but I don't see how this can map to any point in the plane. Don't we need an angular description as well? I don't see that in this equation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For position vector, you can always represent a position vector as a sum between a radial vector and angular vector. But the resultant vector turns out to be another radial vector, therefore it's superfluous to use the representation which contains the angular component.
 
Last edited:
Polar co-ordinates for a plane involve two quantities, 'r' and 'Theta' just like 'x'and 'y' in Cartesian system . If you only specify 'r' then you are not giving the complete picture. It is like mentioning only the 'x' or 'y' in Cartesian co-ordinates.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
Online I have read that the position vector in polar coordinates is ⃗r=|r|^rr→=|r|r^\vec{r} = |r| \hat{r}, but I don't see how this can map to any point in the plane.
The thing that you have to keep in mind is that in polar coordinates the basis vectors ##\hat r## and ##\hat{\theta}## are functions of the coordinates ##r## and ##\theta##. So ##\vec{r} = |r|\hat{r}## should probably be written ##\vec{r} = |r|\hat{r}_{(r,\theta)}## for clarity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: GR191511 and Molar
Dale said:
The thing that you have to keep in mind is that in polar coordinates the basis vectors ##\hat r## and ##\hat{\theta}## are functions of the coordinates ##r## and ##\theta##. So ##\vec{r} = |r|\hat{r}## should probably be written ##\vec{r} = |r|\hat{r}_{(r,\theta)}## for clarity.
Excellent answer. The only thing I would add would be that, in polar coordinates, the two unit vectors are functions only of ##\theta## (and not r).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale and Molar
Chestermiller said:
Excellent answer. The only thing I would add would be that, in polar coordinates, the two unit vectors are functions only of ##\theta## (and not r).
Oops, you are completely correct.
 
So using the notation ##\vec{r} = |r| \hat{r}_{(\theta)}## how would I write out the vector (for example) ##\vec{r} = 2\hat{i} + 4 \hat{j}?##
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
So using the notation ##\vec{r} = |r| \hat{r}_{(\theta)}## how would I write out the vector (for example) ##\vec{r} = 2\hat{i} + 4 \hat{j}?##
What's the angle that the vector <2, 4> makes, and what is its magnitude?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K