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

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding Equation 3.6 in "Covariant Physics" by Moataz H. Emam, specifically regarding the transformation of a displacement vector. Participants highlight the use of Einstein index notation to demonstrate the covariance of classical mechanics, noting that the equation involves both the transformation of the position vector and its derivative. A key point is that Equation 3.6 contains a typo, where an index should read "j." The derivation is described as straightforward, involving the transformation of coordinates and the application of the chain or product rule. Overall, the equation illustrates how the transformation behaves like a tensor, maintaining invariance.
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.
 
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K