Inertia matrix from orbital angular momentum of the ith element (please check)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the inertia matrix from the orbital angular momentum of the ith element of mass. Participants explore the mathematical relationships between angular momentum, inertia, and the properties of vectors involved, including orthogonality and matrix representation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derivation of the orbital angular momentum and attempts to express it in terms of the inertia matrix, questioning if their approach is correct.
  • Another participant suggests using 'i' to denote the ith particle for clarity and points out a potential typo in the notation of angular momentum.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty about the validity of their conclusion regarding the orthogonality of vectors r_i and ω, seeking confirmation on this point.
  • There is a discussion about the scalar nature of m_i and its placement within the equations, with a confirmation that it can be moved freely.
  • One participant requests a matrix solution for the inertia matrix, indicating a struggle to derive the elements from the equations provided, assuming orthogonality holds.
  • A later reply clarifies that the inertia matrix can be diagonal, providing a specific form for the diagonal elements based on the derived expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the orthogonality of the vectors involved and the clarity of notation. While there are confirmations on certain points, the overall discussion remains unresolved with multiple viewpoints on the derivation and representation of the inertia matrix.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in notation clarity and the implications of assumptions regarding vector properties, particularly orthogonality. The discussion also reflects on the need for a matrix representation, which has not been fully established.

ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2
Starting with the orbital angular momentum of the ith element of mass, $ \vec{L}_I = \vec{r}_I \times \vec{p}_I = m_i \vec{r}_i \times \left( \omega \times \vec{r}_i\right) $, derive the inertia matrix such that
$\vec{L} =I\omega, |\vec{L} \rangle = I |\vec{\omega} \rangle $

I used a X b X c = -c X a X b:

$ \vec{L}_i = -m_i \left( \vec{r}_i \times \vec{r}_i \times \omega \right) $

Using bac-cab, $ \vec{L}_i = -m_i \left( \vec{r}_i \left( \vec{r}_i \cdot \omega \right) -\vec{\omega}\left( \vec{r}_i \cdot\vec{r}_i \right) \right)$ and $\vec{r}_i \cdot \vec{\omega} = 0$ (orthogonal), so $ \vec{L}_I = m_i \left( \vec{\omega}\left( \vec{r}_i \cdot\vec{r}_i \right) \right)$ and $ I =m_i \vec{r}^2_i $ ...

That look right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ognik said:
Starting with the orbital angular momentum of the ith element of mass, $ \vec{L}_I = \vec{r}_I \times \vec{p}_I = m_i \vec{r}_i \times \left( \omega \times \vec{r}_i\right) $, derive the inertia matrix such that
$\vec{L} =I\omega, |\vec{L} \rangle = I |\vec{\omega} \rangle $

I used a X b X c = -c X a X b:

$ \vec{L}_i = -m_i \left( \vec{r}_i \times \vec{r}_i \times \omega \right) $

Using bac-cab, $ \vec{L}_i = -m_i \left( \vec{r}_i \left( \vec{r}_i \cdot \omega \right) -\vec{\omega}\left( \vec{r}_i \cdot\vec{r}_i \right) \right)$ and $\vec{r}_i \cdot \vec{\omega} = 0$ (orthogonal), so $ \vec{L}_I = m_i \left( \vec{\omega}\left( \vec{r}_i \cdot\vec{r}_i \right) \right)$ and $ I =m_i \vec{r}^2_i $ ...

That look right ?
Two comments. When you use I as the moment of inertia please exclusively (if you can) use i to indicate the ith particle. [math]L_I[/math] is somewhat unclear. Also, you have a typo: The last expression should be [math]\vec{L}_i = \vec{ \omega } ~ m_i ( \vec{r}_i \cdot \vec{r} _i )[/math].

-Dan
 
Hi - that I subscript is an annoying auto-correct in browsers (unless it is in this editor?) , which I haven't figured out how to turn off - normally I catch them all...

I am not sure my conclusion that $r_i$ and $\omega$ are orthog. is valid?

Please confirm, in that last expression, because $m_i$ is scalar it can be moved anywhere in the term?

This is a section on matrices & eigenvalues, so I'd like a matrix solution for I, something like $ \begin{bmatrix}L_1\\L_2\\L_3\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}I_{11}&I_{12}&I_{13}\\I_{21}&...\\...&&I_{33}\end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}\omega_1\\ \omega_2\\ \omega_3\end{bmatrix} $ but I'm struggling to figure out the I elements from the 2 term eqtn I got (assuming r & $\omega$ orthog. that is)
 
ognik said:
I am not sure my conclusion that $r_i$ and $\omega$ are orthog. is valid?
Yeah, autocorrect features are a pain in the pahtootie.

[math]\vec{r}[/math] and [math]\vec{\omega}[/math] are defined to be perpendicular. Note though, that both can be functions of position or time.

ognik said:
Please confirm, in that last expression, because $m_i$ is scalar it can be moved anywhere in the term?
Correct.

ognik said:
This is a section on matrices & eigenvalues, so I'd like a matrix solution for I, something like $ \begin{bmatrix}L_1\\L_2\\L_3\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}I_{11}&I_{12}&I_{13}\\I_{21}&...\\...&&I_{33}\end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}\omega_1\\ \omega_2\\ \omega_3\end{bmatrix} $ but I'm struggling to figure out the I elements from the 2 term eqtn I got (assuming r & $\omega$ orthog. that is)
You have one. Rewrite the expression as [math]L_i = \left ( m_i \vec{r}_i \cdot \vec{r}_i \right ) \omega _i[/math]. This is now of the form: [math]\vec{L} = I \vec{\omega}[/math] where [math]I_{ii} = m_i~ \vec{r}_i \cdot \vec{r}_i[/math], to be explicit. Since the matrix elements [math]I_{ij}[/math], where i and j aren't equal, don't appear in the expressions then I is diagonal.

-Dan
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K