How Do Velocity and Displacement Vectors Transform in Plane Polar Coordinates?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ShayanJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    quantities Strange
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the transformation of velocity and displacement vectors when transitioning from Cartesian coordinates to plane polar coordinates. Participants explore the implications of these transformations, particularly focusing on whether velocity transforms contravariantly or covariantly, and the nature of the scalar function φ = xy under coordinate rotations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the transformation of the velocity vector in polar coordinates, suggesting it does not transform contravariantly or covariantly based on their calculations.
  • Another participant questions the initial transformation of the second component of the velocity vector, proposing it should include a factor of r.
  • A different participant recalls the transformation law for contravariant vectors, asserting that the inclusion of r is unnecessary.
  • Concerns are raised about the dimensional consistency of the velocity transformation, noting that omitting r results in a dimensionally incorrect expression.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the invariance of the scalar function φ = xy under coordinate rotation.
  • Another participant questions the assumption that xy should be invariant under rotations, seeking clarification on this point.
  • A further participant asserts that while xy is mathematically a scalar, it does not qualify as a physical scalar attribute, which complicates its invariance under transformations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the transformation properties of velocity vectors and the nature of the scalar function φ = xy. There is no consensus on whether velocity transforms contravariantly or covariantly, and the discussion regarding the invariance of φ remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in their assumptions regarding the transformation laws and the definitions of scalars in different contexts. The discussion reflects a complex interplay of mathematical definitions and physical interpretations.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
Consider the velocity vector v^i=\dot{x}^i \hat{e}_i.
We know that in the plane polar coordinates,it becomes \vec{v}=\dot{r}\hat{r}+r\dot{\theta}\hat{\theta}
We also know that it is a contravariant vector so if we transform it covariantly from cartesian coordinates to plane polar coordinates,we should
get the second equation above from the first.

<br /> v^1_{polar}=\frac{\partial r}{\partial x} \dot{x} + \frac{\partial r}{\partial y} \dot{y} = \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}} \dot{x}+<br /> \frac{y}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\dot{y}=\cos{\theta} ( \dot{r} \cos{\theta}-r \dot{\theta} \sin{\theta}) + \sin{\theta} ( \dot{r} \sin{\theta} +<br /> r \dot{\theta} \cos{\theta}) = \dot{r} \cos^2{\theta} -r \dot{\theta} \sin{\theta} \cos{\theta} + \dot{r} \sin^2{\theta} + r \dot{\theta} \sin{\theta}\cos{\theta}=\dot{r}<br />

Well,this has no problem

<br /> v^2_{polar}=\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}\dot{x}+\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial y} \dot{y}=-\frac{y}{x^2+y^2} \dot{x}+\frac{x}{x^2+y^2} \dot{y}=<br /> -\frac{\sin{\theta}}{r} ( \dot{r} \cos{\theta}-r \dot{\theta} \sin{\theta})+\frac{\cos{\theta}}{r}( \dot{r} \sin{\theta} + r \dot{\theta} \cos{\theta})=<br /> -\frac{\dot{r}}{r} \sin{\theta} \cos{\theta} + \dot{\theta} \sin^2{\theta} + \frac{\dot{r}}{r} \cos{\theta} \sin{\theta} + \dot{\theta} \cos^2{\theta}=\dot{\theta}<br />

You see?!It lacks r !

It seeme that velocity does not transform contravariantly under transformation from cartesian coordinates to plane polar coordinates!
I don't mean it transforms covariantly because that one gives sth completely different.
So looks like velocity transforms not contravariantly NOR covariantly!

Now consider the displacement vector \vec{r}=x \hat{i} + y \hat{j}
We know that its a contravariant vector,and we have seen the proof so I don't bother writing it.
But maybe someone bored,wants to have some fun and tries to transform it covariantly to plane polar coordinates(Well,that was not my reason)

<br /> r^1_{polar}=\frac{\partial x}{\partial r} x + \frac{\partial y}{\partial r} y = \cos{\theta} x + \sin{\theta} y = r \cos^2{\theta} + r \sin^2{\theta} =r<br />

<br /> r^2_{polar}=\frac{\partial x}{\partial \theta} x + \frac{\partial y}{\partial \theta} y = -r \sin{\theta} x + r \cos{\theta} y=-r^2 \sin{\theta} \cos{\theta} + r^2 \cos{\theta}\sin{\theta}=0<br />

You see,it gives the same vector as the contravariant transformation does.Looks like displacement vector transforms contravariantly AND covariantly under transformation from
cartesian to plane polar coordinates.

Sorry to make it too long,but also consider\phi=xy
It seems to be a scalar meaning if we rotate the coordinate system,It remains invariant and we get \phi&#039;=x&#039;y&#039; and \phi&#039;=\phi

<br /> \phi&#039;=x&#039;y&#039;=(x \cos{\psi} - y \sin{\psi})(x \sin{\psi} + y \cos{\psi} )=x^2 \sin{\psi} \cos{\psi} +xy \cos^2{\psi} - xy \sin^2{\psi} -y^2 \sin{\psi} \cos{\psi}=<br /> (x^2-y^2)\sin{\psi}\cos{\psi}+xy(\cos^2{\psi}-\sin^2{\psi})<br />

So it seems \phi&#039;=\phi only if \psi=k \pi which suggests that \phi is not a scalar.
So what is it?
Also I should say that \vec{\nabla} \phi behaves like what I said about velocity vector!

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Shyan said:
<br /> v^2_{polar}=\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}\dot{x}+\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial y} \dot{y}

Shouldn't that be
<br /> v^2_{polar}=\frac{r\partial \theta}{\partial x}\dot{x}+\frac{r\partial \theta}{\partial y} \dot{y}
?
 
As I remember the transformation law for contravariant vectors is as below:
<br /> A&#039;^i=\frac{\partial x&#039;^i}{\partial x^j} A^j<br />
I see no reason for putting that r!
 
Shyan said:
As I remember the transformation law for contravariant vectors is as below:
<br /> A&#039;^i=\frac{\partial x&#039;^i}{\partial x^j} A^j<br />
I see no reason for putting that r!

Dimensionally, v is L/T, yes? Without the r, the RHS has dimension 1/T.
 
I see,your right!
But what about the thing I said about \phi=xy?
Thanks
 
I couldn't understand why you thought xy ought to be invariant under coordinate rotation.
 
Isn't xy,a scalar?
If it is,it should be invariant under rotations!
 
I think you're confusing two very different usages of the term scalar.
xy is a scalar mathematically, but not in the sense of a scalar physical attribute (such as distance between two points, mass, charge, value of a scalar field at a point...)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K