How to find the curl of a vector field which points in the theta direction?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the curl of a vector field expressed in spherical coordinates, specifically $$ \mathbf A = \frac{\mu_0~n~I~r}{2} ~\hat \phi$$. The user explores two methods: converting to Cartesian coordinates or calculating directly in spherical coordinates, ultimately opting for the latter. The curl is computed, yielding results for each component, with particular emphasis on the azimuthal component being non-zero while the radial and polar components are zero. There is also clarification on the interpretation of the vector field's magnitude and the relationship between spherical and Cartesian coordinates. The conversation highlights the importance of correctly applying coordinate transformations and understanding vector components in different systems.
  • #31
Well we all are humans, we can do mistakes. No one is perfect.

@benorin The fact that you admitted your mistake I believe it says a lot about your ethos.
 
  • Like
Likes benorin
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
@Delta2 thanks. Bonus points for quoting he who was my hero during my romance with philosophy in college: Socrates.
 
  • Like
Likes Adesh and Delta2
  • #33
I think a Cartesian coordinate system is actually defined as an affine coordinate system with origin ##O## and an orthonormal basis {##\vec{e}_x, \vec{e}_y, \vec{e}_z##} where the coordinates of ##P## are a tuple containing the components of the position vector ##\overrightarrow{OP} = x\vec{e}_x + y\vec{e}_y + z\vec{e}_z##.

Part of the confusion might be because it is not obvious how a polar/spherical coordinate system is defined, because the basis vectors depend on the position. I.e. we can only say ##\overrightarrow{OP} = r\hat{r}##, and the components of this vector evidently don't give us the coordinates.

Perhaps someone (@Orodruin/@Delta2) might be able to elaborate on how the mapping from ##A## to ##\mathbb{R}_n## is achieved for polar coordinates?
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman and Delta2
  • #34
etotheipi said:
Part of the confusion might be because it is not obvious how a polar/spherical coordinate system is defined, because the basis vectors depend on the position. I.e. we can only say ##\overrightarrow{OP} = r\hat{r}##, and the components of this vector evidently don't give us the coordinates.

This is the key issue. In a Cartesian coordinate system, the coordinates also happen to be the components of the position vector. This is generally not true. A coordinate transformation is defined as a 1-to-1 map between two different sets of coordinates. It has no a priori relationship to the components of the position vector, but is just a function from an n-tuple of numbers to another n-tuple of numbers. For example, relating polar coordinates on ##\mathbb R^2## to Cartesian coordinates,
$$
x = \rho \cos\phi, \quad y = \rho \sin\phi.
$$
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes berkeman, Delta2 and etotheipi

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K