Rotations of Earth and other Rigid Bodies

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical modeling of rotations in rigid bodies, particularly planets, using one-parameter group actions. It highlights the complexities of Earth's rotation due to its non-spherical shape, which leads to phenomena like nutation and precession. The International Earth Rotation and Reference System Service (IERS) is mentioned as a key resource for reference frames in navigation and astronomy. A recommended reference for further reading is "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications" by David Vallado. The conversation also touches on the distinction between geometric definitions of rotation and their physical, time-dependent nature, questioning the applicability of one-parameter actions in this context.
Peaks Freak
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Does anyone know of a good mathematical reference covering the use of one-parameter group actions to model rotations of planets and/or other rigid bodies?

Thanks in advance!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
It's not that simple. The Earth is not a spherical body, so it undergoes nutation and precession as well as rotating.

That said, the International Earth Rotation and Reference System Service (IERS) is the official organization that defines reference frames used for navitation and astronomy. See http://www.iers.org/MainDisp.csl?pid=36-25787&prodversid=11221 .

I also suggest "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications", 3rd Edition, David Vallado.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for the reply.

Since I'm mostly interested in the geometry and mathematics involved, I'm assuming that Earth is spherical. My main concern is the use of one-parameter group actions to model time-dependent rotations. As a mathematician, whose specialties are far afield from physics and astronomy, I'm not sure of the right search terms to use here. Kinematics? Dynamical Systems?

Any further help/insight would be appreciated!

Thanks.
 
OK, I think I've formulated a better question, one closer to my actual confusion.

In geometric terms, we define a rotation to be an orientation-preserving isometry that fixes some point p. Thus, a rotation is a map with properties.

In everyday terms, however, a rotation is a time-dependent, physical process. We observe rotations over time, the rotating rigid body passing through a continuum of orientations in between its starting and ending positions.

Whereas the former definition is of a particular kind of map, the second surely involves an action of the real numbers (acting as the passage of time). I'd like to conclude that this action is simply a one-parameter action of SO(3), but don't have experience with this physical setting. Do you know of a reference that addresses this scenario?

Also, does this conversation better belong in a different forum?

Thanks!
 
Peaks Freak said:
I'd like to conclude that this action is simply a one-parameter action of SO(3), but don't have experience with this physical setting.
That is only true for a body that has a spherical mass distribution and no external torques -- Not a particularly interesting or realistic situation.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top