Using Vector Notation in Physics: Appropriate or Wrong?

Click For Summary
Using vector notation in physics requires careful consideration of the quantities involved. Energy is a scalar, so it is incorrect to represent velocity as a vector in equations for kinetic energy. When expressing momentum, it is acceptable to use bold notation for the vector, but clarity is essential to avoid confusion with other variables. Standard practice dictates that only magnitudes should be used in scalar equations, and additional notation may be necessary when distinguishing between different types of quantities. Proper notation ensures clear communication in physics writing.
tomwilliam
Messages
142
Reaction score
3
I have a general question on presenting physics work:

When is it appropriate to use vector (bold) notation? I understand the difference between vectors and scalar quantities, and always used to think an equation with a vector on the LHS needed to have a vector on the RHS, but in writing up a recent question, had this equation:

E_{kin}=1/2mv^{2}

which I then use to produce an equation involving momentum, p, and then the final result which is a dimensionless quantity.

Now I know energy is not a vector quantity. Does that mean it is wrong to put the velocity reference in bold?

The same goes for the expression involving momentum:

E_{kin2}=(p^{2})/2(m+M)

is it wrong to have the p in bold?
Thanks for any advice.
Tom
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[Equation corrected]
tomwilliam said:
E_{kin}=\frac1 2 \,\frac{p^2}{m+M}

is it wrong to have the p in bold?

In my opinion, yes. If you want to use a vector you would need to be a bit more verbose:

E_{kin}=\frac1 2 \,\frac{\mathbf p\cdot \mathbf p}{m+M}

or

E_{kin}=\frac1 2 \,\frac{||\mathbf p||^2}{m+M}

The only time you need to be verbose like that is when you are already using (in this case) a scalar p that denotes something other than the magnitude of the momentum vector. Otherwise, use of a unbolded symbol, particularly when squared, indicates the magnitude of the corresponding vector. It's pretty clear, and that is the standard usage in texts and journals. (Suppose you write a paper in which p denotes momentum but p denotes pressure. This paper will probably come back with some scathing review comments along the lines of "Don't do that! You confused me, and I know the subject.")
 
In an expression for KE, I would not use bold (or any other notation) to represent velocity or momentum as vectors, since only the magnitudes of those quantities are needed.

Realize that: v^2 \equiv \vec{v} \cdot \vec{v}

Edit: While I was daydreaming, D H beat me to it.
 
Thanks all.
Much appreciated.
 
I'm not a student or graduate in Astrophysics.. Wish i were though... I was playing with distances between planets... I found that Mars, Ceres, Jupiter and Saturn have somthing in common... They are in a kind of ratio with another.. They all got a difference about 1,84 to 1,88x the distance from the previous planet, sub-planet. On average 1,845x. I thought this can be coincidential. So i took the big moons of Jupiter and Saturn to do the same thing jupiter; Io, Europa and Ganymede have a...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
9K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K