Two axes in a problem, going from IJK to ijk

  • Thread starter Thread starter NEGATIVE_40
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the representation of a vector in a three-dimensional coordinate system, specifically transitioning from the IJK notation to the ijk notation. Participants are examining the components of a vector defined in terms of angles and unit vectors, and they are trying to clarify the correct formulation of these components based on a provided diagram.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the formulation of the vector K, specifically questioning the expression \(\vec{K}=\vec{j}cos(\gamma)+\vec{k}sin(\gamma)\).
  • Another participant challenges the correctness of the initial formula by suggesting that it does not hold in limiting cases, such as when \(\gamma = 0\) or \(\gamma = \pi/2\).
  • A participant reflects on the orientation of the triangle used to derive the components of the vector, noting that their method seems to yield different results depending on the placement of the right angle in relation to the axes.
  • There is a reiteration of the original formula, with a participant asserting that it aligns with the textbook's description and questioning the validity of the confusion expressed by others.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct formulation of the vector K. There are competing views regarding the interpretation of the angle gamma and its implications for the vector's components.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential limitations in understanding based on the orientation of the triangle and the definitions of the angles involved, which may affect the derivation of the vector components.

NEGATIVE_40
Messages
22
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



*see attachment for diagram*
I'm having trouble understanding a step in an example problem.

"The Z-axis is vertical and carries the unit vector
\vec{K}=\vec{j}cos(\gamma)+\vec{k}sin(\gamma) "
is what I cannot understand.


The Attempt at a Solution



I want to split the K vector into components of j and k, I'm pretty sure.

If I try and do this (see attachment for my triangle), I get
\vec{K}=\vec{j}sin(\gamma)+\vec{k}cos(\gamma)
which is the opposite of what it should be.

Any help would be appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • IJK to ijk conversion.JPG
    IJK to ijk conversion.JPG
    11.6 KB · Views: 571
Physics news on Phys.org
Your formula can't right. To see this, try looking at the limiting cases. If gamma = 0, then K=j, if gamma = pi/2, then K=k.
 
Just thinking about this,

how do I know which way I should have the triangle going? For example, in the diagram I've attached, I have the 90 degree angle on the Y-axis. To get the answer it appears I should just do the opposite (always have 90 degree angle NOT on the IJK axes or parallel to them). That method seems to work, but I doubt that the correct way of thinking about it.

edit: ignore this. It doesn't work. If I have gamma between y and Z axes (the angle here would be gamma) with right angle along y, then I can get the textbook's solution. But then why doesn't this work if I have gamma between Y and z, with right angle along z ?
they seem to be saying the same thing.
 
Last edited:
phyzguy said:
Your formula can't right. To see this, try looking at the limiting cases. If gamma = 0, then K=j, if gamma = pi/2, then K=k.

Are you referring to the correct one given by my textbook?
\vec{K}=\vec{j}cos(\gamma)+\vec{k}sin(\gamma)

if gamma = 0 , then the axis xyz would be lined up so y corresponded to Z. That's exactly what the diagram is saying, so I don't see a problem with that. It's just how the textbook has the axis set up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
567
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K