I How to make something independent of the coordinate frame?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on how to achieve independence from a coordinate frame in classical mechanics, specifically through the use of orthogonal unit vectors at a mass point's trajectory. It highlights that by defining a new set of base vectors, such as the trihedral formed by tangent, normal, and binormal vectors, one can express quantities that are invariant to the original coordinate system. An example provided is the horizontal throw of a mass point, illustrating how new base vectors can be established to make the position vector's components independent of the previous coordinate system. The trihedral consists of three base vectors that are fixed along the trajectory but vary in space. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of redefining the coordinate system to analyze motion without dependence on the initial frame.
glmhd
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
what become independent of coordinate frame when using moving trihedral
In page 49, chap 8 of the book "classical mechanics point particles and relativity" of Greiner, there is the following sentence:
"In order to become independent of the coordinate frame, a set of orthogonal unit vectors is put at the point of the trajectory of the mass point given by ##s##."
Here, what become independent of the coordinate frame? And how using moving trihedral make some quantity independence of the coordinate frame?
A simple, concrete example to illustrate is welcome, like consider the orbit of mass point when throw it hozirontally
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it means that they choose new basevectors (##\vec{T}##,##\vec{N}##,##\vec{B}##) and new coordinatesystem to make components of positionvector indebendent of old coordinate system.
By putting by basevectors they mean defining new coordinate system.
Word trihedral indicates that there are 3 basevectors in new coordinatesystem.
Basevectors are not moving, but are not equal in every point of space. I do not know how these basevectors are defined outside trajectory, but the figure on page 50 and this illustration shows how these basevectors are on trajectory.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty...
Back
Top