How Do You Prove the Time Derivatives of Polar Unit Vectors?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving the time derivatives of polar unit vectors, specifically that d\hat{r}/dt = \dot{\phi} \hat{\phi} and d\hat{\phi}/dt = -\dot{\phi} \hat{r}. Participants explore the geometric interpretation of these derivatives, emphasizing the orthogonality of the unit vectors \hat{r} and \hat{\phi}. Confusion arises regarding the assumption of changes in angle versus changes in radius, but clarification is achieved through the definitions of the unit vectors in Cartesian coordinates. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the geometric context and suggests consulting specific textbooks for further clarity.
A2Airwaves
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove: $$\frac{d\hat{r}}{dt} = \dot{\phi} \hat{\phi }$$ and $$\frac{d\hat{\phi}}{dt} = -\dot{\phi} \hat{r }$$

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I solved this for an Analytical Mechanics assignment a month ago, and completely forgot how it goes..
$$\hat{r} ⊥ \hat{\phi}$$
An change from r1 to r2 will create a ##Δ\phi## that is in the ##\hat{\phi}## direction...
and because ##\hat{r} ⊥ \hat{\phi}##, we can say the same happens for a change from ##\phi1## to ##\phi2## except in the ##-\hat{r}## direction. Assuming the change is infinitesimal, we can write ##Δr## or ##Δ\phi## as d/dt.

But then I'm confused because, why are we assuming a change from r1 to r2 is a rotation by ##Δ\phi,## and not a change of the length r..? Am I getting something completely wrong here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Go back to definition:
##\hat r = \cos(\phi(t)) \vec i + \sin(\phi(t)) \vec j ##
##\hat \phi = -\sin(\phi(t)) \vec i + \cos(\phi(t)) \vec j ##

And use time derivative
 
Go back to definition:
##\hat r = \cos(\phi(t)) \vec i + \sin(\phi(t)) \vec j ##
##\hat \phi = -\sin(\phi(t)) \vec i + \cos(\phi(t)) \vec j ##

And use time derivative
 
geoffrey159 said:
Go back to definition:
##\hat r = \cos(\phi(t)) \vec i + \sin(\phi(t)) \vec j ##
##\hat \phi = -\sin(\phi(t)) \vec i + \cos(\phi(t)) \vec j ##

And use time derivative
Thank you so much!
My professor emphasized the geometric interpretation of the answers that I completely forgot about those definitions.
Worked like magic, problem solved.

By the way, is there a reason why you're writing ##\vec{i}## and not ##\hat{i}##?
I'm used to ##\hat{i}## as a notation for unit vectors, but do you mean the same thing or are you referring to something else?
 
Yes you're right, I meant ##\hat i## and ## \hat j ##.
For clear explanations and nice drawings, look up Kleppner and Kolenkow first chapter.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top