Rotational Symmetry: Deriving Delta X & Delta Y

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the translation formulas for rotational symmetry, specifically delta X = -epsilon Y and delta Y = epsilon X, as presented in Lenny Susskind's lectures. A participant expresses confusion over the derivation of these equations and seeks clarification. Another contributor explains that by applying an infinitesimal rotation matrix about the z-axis, the resulting transformations for delta x and delta y can be derived. The derived equations confirm the original formulas, providing the needed clarity. This exchange highlights the importance of understanding rotational transformations in classical mechanics.
adkinje
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I've been following along with Lenny Susskinds lectures on modern classical mechanics on youtube.

at 34:30 he writes a few translation formulas on the board:
delta X = - epsilon Y
delta Y = epsilon X


It's not obvious to me why these equations are true. I can't seem to find a derivation anywhere, nor can I work one out myself. Any help?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I haven't watched the video, but if you perform a http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RotationMatrix.html" by an angle \theta about the z axis on the vector {\bf r} = \left(x,y,z\right), you get r' = r + \Delta r = \left(\cos \theta x - \sin \theta y, \sin \theta x + \cos \theta y ,z\right). For \theta = \epsilon infinitesimal, this becomes r' = r + \delta r = \left(x - \epsilon y, \epsilon x + y ,z\right) = r + \left(- \epsilon y, \epsilon x ,0\right), so that \delta x = - \epsilon y and \delta y = - \epsilon x.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thanks, that's what I was looking for.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top