Rotation matrix between two orthonormal frames

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the rotation matrix between two orthonormal frames of vectors, denoted as N and N'. It explains that for rigid bodies, the relationship between the two frames is established through rotations and translations. The rotation matrix R is calculated as R = N' N^T, where N^T serves as the change of basis from the frame of vectors n to the standard basis. The explanation emphasizes that N' represents the change of basis from the standard basis to the new frame of vectors n'. Understanding this relationship clarifies the transformation between the two orthonormal frames.
santos2015
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am reading a paper and am stuck on the following snippet.

Given two orthonormal frames of vectors ##(\bf n1,n2,n3)## and ##(\bf n'1,n'2,n'3)## we can form two matrices ##N= (\bf n1,n2,n3)## and ##N' =(\bf n'1,n'2,n'3)##. In the case of a rigid body, where the two frames are related via rotations and translations only, we can can calculate the rotation matrix between the two frames as:
##R = N' N^{T} ##.

My linear algebra is quite rusty and I am having some trouble understanding why this is true. Thanks for looking.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let ##\{\mathbf{e}_i\}## be the standard basis ##\mathbf{e}_1 = (1,0,0)^T,\ldots##. Then ##N^T## is the change of basis from ##\{ \mathbf{n}_i \}## to ##\{\mathbf{e}_i\}##, since we can show that ##\mathbf{e}_1 = N^T \mathbf{n}_1##, etc. Similarly, ##N'## is the change of basis from ##\{\mathbf{e}_i\}## to ##\{ \mathbf{n}'_i \}##. Therefore the change of basis from ##\{ \mathbf{n}_i \}## to ##\{ \mathbf{n}'_i \}## is given by the product ##N' N^T##.
 
  • Like
Likes santos2015
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K