Determining Sun-O'-Plane Angle with Rolling Motion Correction

  • Thread starter Thread starter jskillz411
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Correction Formula
jskillz411
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
so imagine you have an airplane traveling at an axis projecting a signal vertically down along AF axis and you have some point O on AF axis and a refference angle Sun-O-Plane . the plane gets affected by some rolling motion at a certain known angle... now the axis shifts to A'F' and O become O' I drew a little picture to show my idea. I'm trying to come up wit a correction formula to find out what the new Sun-O'-Plane angle would be .The sun could be at any position. and the information known would be the S-o-P angle along with the planes altitude.

any feed backs guys would be great =)
 

Attachments

  • m.jpg
    m.jpg
    11.5 KB · Views: 428
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure exactly what you mean.
is the distance PO and PO' the same? Or are we to assume O and O' are on the ground (meaning the height doesn't vary)?
If the first case is correct then your shaded region should be an isosceles triangle.
If the second case is correct then you would have a right triangle.
and in both cases one leg of the triangle is completely vertical.
So, which case is it?

Or am I way off?
 
PO is different from PO' and O and O' lay on ground level which truly makes the shaded triangle right angled. also the height does not varry !
The signal is projected vertically down at first than at an angle when roll motion takes place.

thank you...
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top