I Help Understanding Equation 3.6 in Covariant Physics by Moataz H. Emam

louvig
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Screenshot_20230623_170351_Kindle.jpg
I am a physics enthusiast reading Covariant Physics by Moataz H. Emam. In his chapter about Point Particle mechanics there is a transformation equation for a displacement vector. I don't see how he arrived at the final equation 3.6. Is it a chain rule or product rule? Can't seem to figure it out. See attachment. Thanks in advance for any insight.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a bit difficult to read. Also, perhaps needs some context re the author's notation.
 
PeroK said:
It's a bit difficult to read. Also, perhaps needs some context re the author's notation.
Sorry. I tried a screenshot from Kindle instead. I am able to click on it in my smartphone and make it full screen and is legible. The author is showing the covariance of classical mechanics using Einstein index notation. In this instance he is showing the transformation of the position vector which is straightforward and then the transformation of the derivative of the position vector. His point is to show ot transforms like a tensor and is therefore invariant.
 
eq 3.6 has a typo, this index should read ##j## https://web.cortland.edu/moataz.emam/
1687583372935.png


The derivation is straight-forward:
Use that ##\hat{ \textbf{g}}_{i'} = \lambda^k_{i'} \hat{ \textbf{e}}_k ## and ##x^{i'} = \lambda^{i'}_j x^j##.
We get ## d\hat{ \textbf{g}}_{i'} = \hat{ \textbf{e}}_k d \lambda^k_{i'} ## and ##x^{i'} = x^j d\lambda^{i'}_j + \lambda^{i'}_j dx^j##.
And you will obtain the final step in that equation.
 
  • Like
Likes louvig, FactChecker and PeroK
Thank you so much. Makes sense.
 
louvig said:
View attachment 328307I am a physics enthusiast reading Covariant Physics by Moataz H. Emam. In his chapter about Point Particle mechanics there is a transformation equation for a displacement vector. I don't see how he arrived at the final equation 3.6. Is it a chain rule or product rule? Can't seem to figure it out. See attachment. Thanks in advance for any insight.

Everything with primed coordinates was replaced with its transformation. So x’=lambda x and so on.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...

Similar threads

Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
40
Views
5K
Back
Top