Relative Motion & Local Frame’s Position - when projecting components

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the positioning of the origin in a rotating coordinate frame relative to a moving body and an inertial frame of reference (IFR). Participants clarify that the origin can either remain fixed to the moving body or to the IFR, with the latter allowing for rotation but not translation. The conversation highlights the complexity of applying physics laws in such frames, particularly when dealing with spherical motion and coordinate transformations. The conclusion reached is that the spherical coordinate frame's origin should ideally be positioned at the inertial origin for clarity in calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of rotating coordinate frames
  • Familiarity with inertial frames of reference (IFR)
  • Knowledge of spherical coordinates and unit vectors
  • Basic principles of vector mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of rotating frames in classical mechanics
  • Learn about the transformation of coordinates in spherical motion
  • Explore the mathematical foundations of vector transformations
  • Investigate the laws of physics in non-inertial frames
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics, coordinate transformations, and the application of mathematical principles in physical scenarios.

MD LAT 1492
Messages
7
Reaction score
3
Does the position of the origin for the body’s rotating coordinate frame
1) stay fixed to the moving body or
2) does it stay fixed to the inertial frame, yet still able to rotate as the body rotates with the only restriction that it cannot translate with the body i.e. only affixed at the inertial frame.

thank you and I appreciate the time you take to answer this!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
As you wish. For an example, say the body is at rest in inertial frame of reference. You can set any frame of reference where the body is rotating ( not the body but you spin. ) and the Origin moves or fixed as you wish to set. This is rather mathematics discussion than physics. The law of physics in that frame is very messy one.

I think you have more specific case in mind saying "the body is rotating". I would like to know it.
 
Last edited:
anuttarasammyak said:
As you wish. For an example, say the body is at rest in inertial frame of reference. You can set any frame of reference where the body is rotating ( not the body but you spin. ) and the Origin moves or fixed as you wish to set. This is rather mathematics discussion than physics. The law of physics in that frame is very messy one.

I think you have more specific case in mind saying "the body is rotating". I would like to know it.
Thank you for your answer and it has helped remind me.

In my problem, I was describing the spherical motion of a body (a) relative to an inertial frame (o), where I had placed the spherical unit vectors and also that spherical coordinate frame's origin at the body - this is the part that confused me.

Because when I described the position vector of (a) relative to inertial origin (o) in terms of the spherical basis, it showed that my position was in the negative radial direction.

I know that by just multiplying by a negative would flip the direction, but this brought up the question of where the generated spherical origin is actually positioned.

In my mind, I can only think that the generated spherical coordinate frame's origin should be positioned at the origin (o) to make sense.
 
From what you said I assume the case you set is :
The center of spherical motion O and OXYZ axes stay at rest in a IFR
r, the distance from the center O, remains constant. So the motion has freedom of ##\theta## and ##\phi##.
Is it all right ?
 
Last edited:
anuttarasammyak said:
From what you said I assume the case you set is :
The center of spherical motion O and OXYZ axes stay at rest in a IFR
r, the distance from the center O, remains constant. So the motion has freedom of ##\theta## and ##\phi##.
Is it all right ?
Yes
 
May I think You answer your question in OP as 2)?
 
Last edited:
anuttarasammyak said:
May I think You answer your question in OP as 2)?
Ok now I also think that is the answer. Thank you
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: anuttarasammyak

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K