Vector squared in polar coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation and application of vector notation, particularly in polar coordinates, and its implications for kinetic energy expressions. Participants explore the validity of a specific equation relating to vector magnitudes and their derivatives.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the equation \( a^2 = \vec{a} \cdot \vec{a} \) is valid, but question its applicability in polar coordinates.
  • One participant expresses confusion over the kinetic energy term in polar coordinates, noting that \( \dot{r}^2 \) does not align with their initial equation.
  • Another participant explains that the derivative of the modulus of a vector is not the modulus of the derivative, which complicates the relationship between the equations.
  • There is a discussion about the notation used for vectors and their derivatives, with emphasis on the importance of clarity in definitions.
  • One participant highlights that in polar coordinates, the expression for kinetic energy must account for additional terms related to angular velocity.
  • Several participants acknowledge the potential for confusion when transitioning between Cartesian and polar coordinate systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the initial equation in various contexts, particularly in relation to polar coordinates. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the applicability of the equation and the interpretation of kinetic energy terms.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the definitions and notations used, which may lead to misunderstandings. The discussion also highlights the need for careful consideration of vector derivatives in different coordinate systems.

dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
63
Hi
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus but when it comes to the kinetic energy term for a particle in plane polar coordinates I'm confused ( i apologise here as i don't know how to write time derivative with the dot on top).
In this case you get
r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
which doesn't seem to fit with Equation 1. I know how to derive this equation but i.m confused as to why it doesn't fit with Equation 1
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dyn said:
Hi
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus but when it comes to the kinetic energy term for a particle in plane polar coordinates I'm confused ( i apologise here as i don't know how to write time derivative with the dot on top).
In this case you get
r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
which doesn't seem to fit with Equation 1. I know how to derive this equation but i.m confused as to why it doesn't fit with Equation 1
Thanks
What doesn't fit? In Cartesian cordinates we have: $$\mathbf{\dot r}^2 = \dot x^2 + \dot y^2$$
 
If we have a vector ##\vec{a}=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)## in Cartesian coordinates, then the "multiplication with itself", i.e. the scalar product with itself represents the scalar ##\vec{a} \cdot \vec{a}^\tau=\sum_{i=1}^n a_i^2.##

In case ##\vec{a}=\vec{r} \cdot \cos\varphi ## is given in polar coordinates, we get ##\vec{a}\cdot\vec{a}^\tau=\vec{r}\cdot\vec{r}^\tau \cdot \cos^2\varphi .##
 
dyn said:
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus

Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
 
dyn said:
Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
Depends on whether you manage to make it a correct equation. Neither bold and non-bold letters nor the dot has been defined. It is guesswork when we read it as ##\vec{a}\cdot\vec{a}^\tau.##
 
dyn said:
Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
Equation 1 is a definition, so yes.
 
If equation 1 is always correct ; then in polar coordinates it should ber(dot)2 = r(dot)2 Equation A

but actually the correct equation is r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
I understand how to derive this but my question is ; if equation 1 is correct why is Equation A not correct ?
 
Well, simply. Because the derivative of the module is not the module of the derivative.
To help visualize let's change a little the notation, let's say we have a vector ##\vec{r}## and we define it time derivative ##\vec{v} = \frac{d\vec{r}}{d t}##.
Then its true that
$$r^2 = \vec{r}\cdot \vec{r} = \vec{r}^2, \qquad v^2= \vec{v}\cdot \vec{v} = \vec{v}^2$$
which is your "equation 1". What it's not true though is
$$v = \frac{dr}{dt}$$
understanding the symbol without an arrow as the module.
What the "equation A" is telling you is that
$$v^2 = \left(\frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 + r^2 \left(\frac{d\theta}{dt}\right)^2$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dyn and PeroK
Thanks for your replies. I think I'm having a bit of a brain freeze on this at the moment
 
  • #10
dyn said:
Thanks for your replies. I think I'm having a bit of a brain freeze on this at the moment
First, if we use the dot product then there is no confusion about what ##\mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}## means. We also recognise this as the magnitude squared of the vector, which we can write as: $$|\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ It's also common to drop the modulus symbols and write: $$\mathbf{\dot r}^2 \equiv |\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ Finally, it's common to write the modulus of a vector not in boldface, so we write:$$v^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r}^2 \equiv |\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ Where we have essentially defined $$v \equiv \sqrt{\mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}}$$
Now, there is a point over which we must be careful, because we also have: $$r \equiv \sqrt{\mathbf{r} \cdot \mathbf{r}}$$ And, of course, we can take the derivative of that: $$\dot{r} \equiv \frac{dr}{dt} = \frac{d}{dt} \sqrt{\mathbf{r} \cdot \mathbf{r}}$$ And now we must be careful as $$\dot r \ne v$$ For example, in Cartesian coordinates we have: $$v = \sqrt{\dot x^2 + \dot y^2 + \dot z^2}$$ and $$\dot r = \frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2}$$ Which are clearly not the same thing.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dyn
  • #11
I think my confusion comes from the point that usually we write the modulus of vector a as a but in polar coordinates the modulus of vector r(dot) is not r(dot). It contains an extra term with θ(dot) in it
Hence when writing the kinetic energy of a point particle i should write (1/2)m r(dot)2 and not write it as (1/2)m r(dot)2 as that is not correct in polar coordinates
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K