I Is x{hat} a unit vector and why is theta a vector?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter cgreeleybsu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coordinates
AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies that x{hat} is indeed a unit vector pointing in the +x direction, while y{hat} points in the +y direction. At any point, r{hat} is the unit vector pointing away from the origin, and theta{hat} is perpendicular to r{hat}, indicating the direction of increasing theta. The conversation emphasizes that these unit vectors are distinct from the coordinates themselves, which do not carry a "hat." Understanding these concepts is essential for grasping more advanced topics in physics and mathematics.
cgreeleybsu
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
I have a physics test tommorow, and my physics professor said this homework was important. However I have been having difficulty interpreting it. Can someone help me with this. Is x{hat} a unit vector. The part that says +x{hat} axis seems to imply that, but then where does the length for r{hat} come from. Why is theta a vector?

Im so confused, I don't know when to ask for help sometimes until its too late, please help :nb)
 

Attachments

  • huh.PNG
    huh.PNG
    48.6 KB · Views: 384
Physics news on Phys.org
cgreeleybsu said:
Is x{hat} a unit vector.
Yes. ##\hat x## is the unit vector that points in the +x direction. Similarly, ##\hat y## is the unit vector that points in the +y direction. Note that these are not the same things as the x and y coordinates of a point, which don't bear a "hat".

At a given point, ##\hat r## is the unit vector that points away from the origin, in the direction of increasing r. At that point, ##\hat \theta## is the unit vector perpendicular to ##\hat r## that points in the direction of increasing ##\theta## (i.e. counterclockwise around the origin). Note that these are not the same things as the r and ##\theta## coordinates (polar coordinates) of the point, which don't bear a "hat".

I think it would be very helpful to draw a careful diagram, to scale, that shows a point in the second quadrant, and all four of these unit vectors. Choose a point for which the coordinate ##\theta## is not close to 135° (halfway between the +y and -x axes), but instead something like maybe 120° or 150° (closer to one axis or the the other). This will make it easier to see which trig functions (sin or cos) are involved where.
 
jtbell said:
Yes. ##\hat x## is the unit vector that points in the +x direction. Similarly, ##\hat y## is the unit vector that points in the +y direction. Note that these are not the same things as the x and y coordinates of a point, which don't bear a "hat".

At a given point, ##\hat r## is the unit vector that points away from the origin, in the direction of increasing r. At that point, ##\hat \theta## is the unit vector perpendicular to ##\hat r## that points in the direction of increasing ##\theta## (i.e. counterclockwise around the origin). Note that these are not the same things as the r and ##\theta## coordinates (polar coordinates) of the point, which don't bear a "hat".

I think it would be very helpful to draw a careful diagram, to scale, that shows a point in the second quadrant, and all four of these unit vectors. Choose a point for which the coordinate ##\theta## is not close to 135° (halfway between the +y and -x axes), but instead something like maybe 120° or 150° (closer to one axis or the the other). This will make it easier to see which trig functions (sin or cos) are involved where.
Thank you for the reply, sorry for the late response, so would I be correct in saying ##\hat r## is the gradient (which will only point out because of the quadrant selected), and ##\hat θ## is the curl at that particular location?
 
cgreeleybsu said:
Thank you for the reply, sorry for the late response, so would I be correct in saying ##\hat r## is the gradient (which will only point out because of the quadrant selected), and ##\hat θ## is the curl at that particular location?
Hi, I know you've already had your test, but presumably knowing about this would be useful for the final exam or for that matter understanding any material that uses coordinates somehow.

The gradient and curl have to do with fields (i.e. scalar or vector functions in space), not with the coordinates themselves. As jtbell indicated, the "hat" vectors are simply unit vectors that indicate the direction of increase of a particular coordinate variable (x, y, r, theta).

To speak of "the gradient", we have to know what scalar function we are taking the gradient of. Likewise for curl and vector functions.

Hope that helps.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top