Understanding Vector Rotation and Derivation of Angular Velocity Formula

  • Thread starter Thread starter sherlockjones
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rotating Vectors
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the derivation of the angular velocity formula from vector rotation, specifically focusing on a vector \vec{A}(t) with constant magnitude that changes only in direction. The key point is that the change in the vector, represented as \Delta \vec{A}, relates to the angle change \Delta \theta through the trigonometric expression |\Delta \vec{A}| = 2A\sin\frac{\Delta \theta}{2}, which is derived using trigonometric identities. Participants clarify that the correct notation involves using \theta instead of t for angular changes and correcting a typo regarding the magnitude of the vector. The calculations show that the squared terms simplify to yield the half-angle formula, confirming the relationship between the vector change and angular velocity. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the mathematical foundations of vector rotation and angular velocity derivation.
sherlockjones
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Lets say we have a vector \vec{A}(t) with a constant magnitude A. Thus \vec{A}(t) can only change in direction (rotation). We know that \frac{d\vec{A}}{dt} is always perpendicular to \vec{A}. This is where I become stuck:

\Delta \vec{A} = \vec{A}(t+\Delta t)-\vec{A}(t)
|\Delta \vec{A}| = 2A\sin\frac{\Delta \theta}{2}.

How do we get the trigonometric expression on the right in the second equation? It looks like some type of half/double angle formula. Eventually we are supposed to get \vec{A}\frac{d\theta}{dt} or the angular velocity of \vec{A}


Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Interesting! I was sure that couldn't possibly be correct when I started calculating it!

First, what you have is for
\Delta \vec{A} = \vec{A}(\theta+\Delta \theta)-\vec{A}(\theta)
that is, with \theta not t. And, of course, there is a typo in the second equation: you mean |\vec{A}|, not just A.

Any plane vector of constant length r can be written \vec{A}= rcos(\theta)\vec{i}+ rsin(\theta)\vec{j}. Then
\vec{A(\theta+ \Delta\theta)}- \vec{A(\theta)}= r((cos(\theta+ \Delta\theta)- cos(\theta))\vec{i}+ (sin(\theta+ \Delta\theta)- sin(\theta))\vec{j})
You can use cos(a+ b)= cos(a)cos(b)- sin(a)sin(b) and sin(a+b)= sin(a)cos(b)+ cos(a)sin(b) to expand those. I won't do all of the calculations here (writing all of that in LaTex would be more tedious than the calculations!) but squaring each those and summing reduces to 2- 2cos(\Delta\theta). I was surprised when I saw that the terms involving only \theta rather than /Delta/theta cancel out! Of course, the square root of that does give the half angle formula.
 
it was actually the change in \vec{A} in the time interval t to t + \Delta t. So wouldn't it be: \Delta \vec{A} = \vec{A}(t+\Delta t)-\vec{A}(t)?
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top