Transport Theorem Explained in Non-Physicist Terms

  • Thread starter Thread starter SubZer0
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem Transport
AI Thread Summary
The Transport Theorem describes how the rate of change of a function in a rotating reference frame can be expressed as the sum of its local rate of change and an additional term accounting for the rotation. The discussion highlights confusion regarding the expected velocity components when a particle is rotated, specifically questioning why only the z-component appears in the derivative. Clarification comes from recognizing that the velocity of a particle in circular motion does not have both x and z components at a specific instant; instead, it aligns with the direction of the tangent to the circular path. The relationship between angular velocity and the resulting velocity is emphasized, illustrating that the motion is instantaneous and directional. Understanding this concept resolves the initial confusion about the visual representation of the theorem.
SubZer0
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Can anybody explain the Transport Theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_reference_frame#Relating_rotating_frames_to_stationary_frames) in more non-physicist terms? I simply can't wrap my head around the visual of this theorem, which has the gist of:

d/dt f = df/dt + (angular velocity) x f(t)

Where f(t) represents the position in time.

I simply cannot visualise the result. If I use an angular velocity vector of [0, 1, 0] (rotation around y axis), and a position of [0.5, 0, 0], the resulting derivative is [0, 0, -0.5]. I would at least expect a time derivative with changes of x, and z, instead of just z. Am I not understanding the actual *meaning* of the result? If df/dt = [0, 0, 0], I'm assuming that the rotation should result in a derivative vector of something like [x, 0, z], where x and z are some non-zero values?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm more familiar with the Reynold Transport theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_transport_theorem), but your post seems to be a special case.

The Reynolds transport theorem simply accounts for changes in the coordinate system (or changes to the shape of a volume) in addition to changes in a physical quantity. I suspect the same holds for you- the second term accounts for the rotating coordinate system.
 
Thanks for the reply, Andy. I looked into some physics texts, and I think what was throwing me off was the fact that a rotation of a particle [1, 0, 0] around y [0, +/- 1, 0] in the equation (what you were referring to above as the derivative accounting for the rotation of the frame), ended up with a velocity which was [0, 0, +/- 1], which, when you think about it, a rotation with an angular velocity of [0, +/- 1, 0] *would* result in a velocity of the particle of [0, 0, +/- 1], ie, the particle is accelerating instantaneously directly forward/backward on the X/Z plane. I think what threw me was the fact that at that instant, I was assuming there would be a velocity which was *turning*, with both X and Z components. Realistically, this is not how the velocity would look at that instant, as the tangent of a particle [1, 0, 0] moving on a circular orbit is [0, 0, 1] at that instant.

So that seems to make sense to me now.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top