Square of orthogonal matrix vanishes

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of orthogonal matrices in the context of kinetic energy and coordinate transformations in physics. The original poster raises a question regarding the absence of the rotation matrix in the expression for kinetic energy, despite its implications for orthogonality and identity.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the rotation matrix and the kinetic energy expression, questioning how the orthogonal nature of the matrix affects the formulation. They discuss the invariance of the dot product under rotations and the differentiation of the coordinate transformation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the mathematical relationships involved, particularly regarding the differentiation of the coordinate transformation and the properties of the rotation matrix. There appears to be an ongoing exploration of the implications of these mathematical properties without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of a homework problem that involves writing the Lagrangian in terms of transformed coordinates and velocities, while also adhering to the properties of orthogonal matrices.

PhysicsRock
Messages
121
Reaction score
19
Homework Statement
We consider a coordinate transform where ##\vec{x}^\prime(t) = R(t) (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))## with a constant ##\vec{a}##.
Write the lagrangian in terms of ##\vec{x}## and ##\dot{\vec{x}}##.
Relevant Equations
Velocity in terms of ##\dot{\vec{x}}## and ##\vec{x}##: ##\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime = R \left[ \dot{\vec{x}} + \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{a} + \vec{x}) \right]##.
Lagrangian function ##L = T - V##.
I found a the answer in a script from a couple years ago. It says the kinetic energy is

$$
T = \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime)^2 = \frac{1}{2} m \left[ \dot{\vec{x}} + \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{a} + \vec{x}) \right]^2
$$

However, it doesn't show the rotation matrix ##R##. This would imply that ##R^2 = R \cdot R = I##. ##R## is an orthogonal matrix, but I'm pretty sure that the square of such is not always equal to the identity.

So then how come the matrix doesn't show up in the expression for the kinetic energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PhysicsRock said:
So then how come the matrix doesn't show up in the expression for the kinetic energy?
The dot product ##\vec{z}\cdot\vec{z}## is shorthand for the matrix multiplication ##z^{T}z##, where ##z## is a column vector. So under a rotation by ##R##, $$\vec{z\,}'\equiv\overleftrightarrow{R}\cdot\vec{z}=R\,z\Rightarrow\vec{z}\,'\cdot\vec{z}\,'=\left(z'\right)^{T}z'=z^{T}R^{T}R\,z=z^{T}z=\vec{z}\cdot\vec{z}$$since ##R## is an orthogonal matrix. (This expresses the invariance of the dot-product under rotations.)
 
PhysicsRock said:
Homework Statement: We consider a coordinate transform where ##\vec{x}^\prime(t) = R(t) (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))## with a constant ##\vec{a}##.
Write the lagrangian in terms of ##\vec{x}## and ##\dot{\vec{x}}##.
Relevant Equations: Velocity in terms of ##\dot{\vec{x}}## and ##\vec{x}##: ##\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime = R \left[ \dot{\vec{x}} + \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{a} + \vec{x}) \right]##.
Lagrangian function ##L = T - V##.
Diffenciating ##\vec{x}^\prime(t) = R(t) (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))## by time, I get
\dot{\vec{x}^\prime(t)} = \dot{R(t)} (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))+R(t) \dot{\vec{x}(t)}
. Is it same as your relevant equation ?
 
renormalize said:
The dot product ##\vec{z}\cdot\vec{z}## is shorthand for the matrix multiplication ##z^{T}z##, where ##z## is a column vector. So under a rotation by ##R##, $$\vec{z\,}'\equiv\overleftrightarrow{R}\cdot\vec{z}=R\,z\Rightarrow\vec{z}\,'\cdot\vec{z}\,'=\left(z'\right)^{T}z'=z^{T}R^{T}R\,z=z^{T}z=\vec{z}\cdot\vec{z}$$since ##R## is an orthogonal matrix. (This expresses the invariance of the dot-product under rotations.)
That makes sense. Thank you.
 
anuttarasammyak said:
Diffenciating ##\vec{x}^\prime(t) = R(t) (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))## by time, I get
\dot{\vec{x}^\prime(t)} = \dot{R(t)} (\vec{a} + \vec{x}(t))+R(t) \dot{\vec{x}(t)}
. Is it same as your relevant equation ?
Yes. Allow me to demonstrate. We start with your expression and factor out an ##R##. Since it is orthogonal that leads us to

$$
\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime = R \left[ \dot{\vec{x}} + R^T \dot{R} ( \vec{a} + \vec{x} ) \right]
$$

Last semester, we derived that ##(R^T \dot{R})_{ij} = - \epsilon_{ijk} \omega_k##, where ##\omega_k## are the components of angular velocity. Now we plug that in and get

$$
\dot{x}^\prime_{i} = R_{ij} ( \dot{x}_j + (R^T \dot{R})_{jk} (a_k + x_k) )
= R_{ij} ( \dot{x}_j + (-\epsilon_{jkl} \omega_l) (a_k + x_k) )
$$

Recall the definition of the vector product ##(\vec{a} \times \vec{b})_i = \epsilon_{ijk} a_j b_k##. With that we obtain

$$
\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime = R ( \dot{\vec{x}} - (\vec{a} + \vec{x}) \times \vec{\omega} )
$$

Since the vector product is antisymmetric, we can alternatively write

$$
\dot{\vec{x}}^\prime = R ( \dot{\vec{x}} + \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{a} + \vec{x}) )
$$

And we're done.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: anuttarasammyak

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K