I Question about the vector cross product in spherical or cylindrical coordinates

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of calculating the vector cross product in spherical or cylindrical coordinates using a determinant format similar to that used in Cartesian coordinates. It is confirmed that this method is valid as long as the basis vectors form a right-handed system, allowing for the use of the determinant with the appropriate unit vectors. However, it is noted that the curl operation does not apply in the same way due to the position-dependent nature of the basis vectors in polar coordinates. The simplest approach suggested is to convert vectors to Cartesian coordinates for the cross product calculation and then revert to spherical or cylindrical coordinates. Overall, the cross product can be computed directly in non-Cartesian coordinates, but understanding the underlying principles is essential.
dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
63
Hi
If i calculate the vector product of a and b in cartesian coordinates i write it as a determinant with i , j , k in the top row. The 2nd row is the 3 components of a and the 3rd row is the components of b.
Does this work for sphericals or cylindricals eg . can i put er , eθ , eφ in the top row with the relevant components in the 2nd and 3rd rows ?
I know that for the formula for grad , div and curl in sphericals or cylindricals then scale factors appear but is the cross product of 2 vectors independent of scale factors ?
Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The simplest solution is to convert both vectors to cartesian, do the cross product and convert backup to spherical or cylindrical.

However, doing the cross product spherically or cylindrically directly boils down to find a vector that is perpendicular to both vectors following the right hand rule convention and recalling that the magnitude of the resultant vector is:

##\vec A \times \vec B = |A||B|sin(\theta)##

where ##\theta## is the angle between ##\vec A## and ##\vec B## and |A| and |B| are the magnitudes of the respective vectors ##\vec A## and ##\vec B##.

There is an old thread on it here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...ame-way-i-do-in-cartesian-coordinates.772165/

A more detailed answer may be found here:

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1358590/cross-product-spherical-coordinates
 
dyn said:
Hi
If i calculate the vector product of a and b in cartesian coordinates i write it as a determinant with i , j , k in the top row. The 2nd row is the 3 components of a and the 3rd row is the components of b.
Does this work for sphericals or cylindricals eg . can i put er , eθ , eφ in the top row with the relevant components in the 2nd and 3rd rows ?
I know that for the formula for grad , div and curl in sphericals or cylindricals then scale factors appear but is the cross product of 2 vectors independent of scale factors ?
Thanks

THe determinant method works for any set of orthogonal unit basis vectors which form a right-handed triple, so if in your convention \mathbf{e}_r \times \mathbf{e}_\theta = \mathbf{e}_{\phi} then <br /> \mathbf{a} \times \mathbf{b} = \left| \begin{matrix}<br /> \mathbf{e}_{r} &amp; \mathbf{e}_{\theta} &amp; \mathbf{e}_{\phi} \\<br /> a_r &amp; a_\theta &amp; a_\phi \\<br /> b_r &amp; b_\theta &amp; b_\phi<br /> \end{matrix}\right|. Curl doesn't work this way because in polar coordinates the basis vectors are functions of position and not constants.
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu, Delta2 and dyn
Thank you
 
Since I've seen you post in some physics sections before, here is an excerpt on how to use the levi-cievta sign from notes i wrote years ago (since physicists love the following two ideas, it's worth getting use to it):

We will now introducte the Levi-Cievta symbol as follows: $$\epsilon_{ijk} = \begin{cases}
1 & 123, 312, 231 \\
-1 & 321, 132, 213 \\
0 & i=j=k
\end{cases} $$

Where the numbers represent the subscripts. So that means ##\epsilon_{123} = 1##. So how do you keep track of which is which? When I was younger, it was introduced to be a permutation, and a bunch of other nomenclature that I couldn't quite grasp until I was older. So I'll give you the secret I used! I simply start with 123, and then bump up the numbers to get 312, then again to get 231. Then, to get the -1, you just start with 321, and do the same. This is essentially what a permutation is, but when you're seeing all this for the first time, and a new symbol, even the simple things seem hard! So, how exactly does this relate to cross product? Well, let me throw out this equation (Note I am using Einstein summation): $$\vec{A} \times \vec{B} = \epsilon_{ijk}A^jB^k\hat{e_i}$$ Pretty obvious now, right? Okay, if it isn't obvious how they're related, don't worry! ##A^j## ##B^k## are the components of our vector, and ##\hat{e_i}##is our basis vector. Let's explicitly write out the sum to see if it will give us the same result as the cross product. \\

$$
\epsilon_{ijk}A^jB^k\hat{e_i} = $$
\begin{align*}
\epsilon_{111}A^1B^1\hat{e_1} + \epsilon_{112}A^1B^2\hat{e_1} + \epsilon_{113}A^1B^3\hat{e_1} + \\ \epsilon_{123}A^2B^3\hat{e_1} + \epsilon_{122}A^2B^2\hat{e_1} + \epsilon_{121}A^2B^1\hat{e_1} +\\
\epsilon_{131}A^3B^1\hat{e_1}+\epsilon_{132}A^3B^2\hat{e_1}+\epsilon_{133}A^3B^3\hat{e_1} +\\ \epsilon_{211}A^1B^1\hat{e_2}+ \epsilon_{212}A^1B^2\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{213}A^1B^3\hat{e_2} + \\
\epsilon_{223}A^2B^3\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{222}A^2B^2\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{221}A^2B^1\hat{e_2} + \\
\epsilon_{231}A^3B^1\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{232}A^3B^2\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{233}A^3B^3\hat{e_2} +\\
\epsilon_{311}A^1B^1\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{312}A^1B^2\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{313}A^1B^3\hat{e_3} + \\
\epsilon_{323}A^2B^3\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{322}A^2B^2\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{321}A^2B^1\hat{e_3} +\\
\epsilon_{331}A^3B^1\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{332}A^3B^2\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{333}A^3B^3\hat{e_3}
\end{align*}

So, I know what you're thinking... 27 terms from such a simple line?! That's the power of the Einstein summation convention! However, I only wrote this out so you can get a feel for that power. In reality, we just use what the Levi-Civita symbol tells, that is any ##i=j=k## just go to zero, so our 27 equations zoom down to 6.
So we're left with
\begin{align*}
\epsilon_{ijk}A^jB^k\hat{e_i} =
\epsilon_{123}A^2B^3\hat{e_1} + \epsilon_{132}A^3B^2\hat{e_1} \\
\epsilon_{231}A^3B^1\hat{e_2} + \epsilon_{213}A^1B^3\hat{e_2} \\
\epsilon_{312}A^1B^2\hat{e_3} + \epsilon_{321}A^2B^1\hat{e_3}
\end{align*}
I've specifically put them in this order for a reason, we can now factor out the specific basis vector on each line and let's see what we get.
We now see that our equation becomes
\begin{align*}
\epsilon_{ijk}A^jB^k\hat{e_i} =
\hat{e_1}(A^2B^3 - A^3B^2) + \\
\hat{e_2}(A^3B^1 - A^1B^3)+ \\
\hat{e_3}(A^1B^2 - A^2B^1)
\end{align*}Which, as you can see, makes no mention of the particular coordinate system you're in. I do go into more details in my notes, but I think this is long enough for you to get the idea!
 
  • Like
Likes dyn and jedishrfu
Nice tensor exposition! However, it may be overkill for the OP as Tensor Analysis is seldom taught until needed in grad school for either Differential Geometry or General Relativity.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Back
Top