Vectors in curvilinear coordinate systems

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of vectors in curvilinear coordinate systems, specifically spherical coordinates. Participants explore the implications of using spherical coordinates compared to Cartesian coordinates, focusing on how vectors are defined and the information conveyed by their components.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of expressing a vector in spherical coordinates as a combination of Cartesian components, citing concerns about the space dependence of basis vectors.
  • Another participant argues that the left-hand side and right-hand side of the proposed equation do not match in terms of units, suggesting that the correct representation in spherical coordinates is simply \(\vec{r} = r\hat{r}\).
  • Some participants express that while \(\hat{r}\) encodes direction, it does not provide a complete picture of the vector's direction compared to Cartesian coordinates.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of using only the radial component \(\hat{r}\) to describe a vector, with one participant emphasizing that additional angular components are necessary to fully specify the direction.
  • Concerns are raised about the breakdown of spherical coordinates at the origin, where unique coordinates cannot be assigned, leading to ambiguity in the direction of \(\hat{r}\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the sufficiency of spherical coordinates to fully describe vectors. There are competing views regarding the necessity of angular components and the implications of using spherical coordinates at the origin.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the representation of vectors in spherical coordinates, particularly regarding the breakdown at the origin and the need for multiple components to define direction accurately.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
To specify a vector in cartesian coordinate systems,we assume its tail to be at the origin and give the cartesian coordinates of its head.What about other coordinate systems?
For example,in spherical coordinates,is the following correct?
<br /> a \hat{x}+b \hat{y}+c \hat{z}=\sqrt{a^2+b^2+c^2} \hat{r}+\cos^{-1}{\frac{c}{\sqrt{a^2+b^2+c^2}}}\hat{\theta}+\tan^{-1}{\frac{b}{a}}\hat{\varphi}<br />

I know,it may seem so easy but the point that's making me doubt it,is the space dependent of the basis vectors in spherical coordinates.I just don't know can I just specify the point that the spherical coordinates of the vector are indicating and connect the origin to that point to show the vector or not!Another reason for doubting the process I explained,is the break down of spherical coordinates at the origin.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No it isn't. The most obvious way to see why it is false is to look at the units. The left hand side is a sum of 3 meter valued quantities whereas the right hand side is a meter valued quantity plus two dimensionless quantities. Anyways, in spherical coordinates one simply writes position vectors from the origin of the frame as \vec{r} = r\hat{r} where r = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2} as before.
 
Yes,you're right.
But that doesn't indicate the direction of the vector so it seems it gives less information than the cartesian form of the vector
 
Sure it does. \hat{r} encodes the direction.
 
I know,\hat{r} does encode the direction,but it does not give us that direction.
 
Shyan said:
I know,\hat{r} does encode the direction,but it does not give us that direction.
what is "that" direction?
 
I mean when we have a vector in cartesian coordinates,we have its magnitude and direction.But when we have a vector in spherical coordinates,we only have its magnitude and we can't have its direction.
 
Shyan said:
,we only have its magnitude and we can't have its direction.
Can you explain why you think that?
 
Just consider the vector a \hat{r}.All it tells us is that the tail is at the origin and the head is on a spherical shell of radius a.I see nothing in that which can indicate a special direction.
 
  • #10
Shyan said:
Just consider the vector a \hat{r}.All it tells us is that the tail is at the origin and the head is on a spherical shell of radius a.I see nothing in that which can indicate a special direction.
I don't get your point.

If you only indicate the x direction in cartesian coordinates, its not the full picture either?
 
  • #11
Shyan said:
Just consider the vector a \hat{r}.All it tells us is that the tail is at the origin and the head is on a spherical shell of radius a.I see nothing in that which can indicate a special direction.
\hat{r} = \sin\theta \cos\varphi \hat{x} + \sin\theta \sin\varphi \hat{y} + \cos\theta \hat{z}. Try to derive this: it is just a simple exercise in geometry. This should make it intuitive to you how the unit radial vector encodes direction.
 
  • #12
Jorriss said:
I don't get your point.

If you only indicate the x direction in cartesian coordinates, its not the full picture either?

If you read previous posts,you see we concluded that vectors in spherical coordinates are specified by only a radial component.

WannabeNewton said:
\hat{r} = \sin\theta \cos\varphi \hat{x} + \sin\theta \sin\varphi \hat{y} + \cos\theta \hat{z}. Try to derive this: it is just a simple exercise in geometry. This should make it intuitive to you how the unit radial vector encodes direction.

I know what you mean,but there are still 2 points:
1-Consider when you have only the spherical coordinates of a vector,not its cartesian ones.
With just a \hat{r} at hand,how can you use that formula?
2-An assumption that we're always making about vectors in such discussions,is that their tail is at the origin.But spherical coordinates break down there and you can't give unique coordinates to the origin.So there is no unique direction for \hat{r} at the origin.
 
  • #13
Shyan said:
If you read previous posts,you see we concluded that vectors in spherical coordinates are specified by only a radial component.

No! You concluded that vectors are specified by r\hat{r}(\varphi,\vartheta), where r, \varphi, and \vartheta are all components!

The radial component is one of three. The other two determine the direction of \hat{r}, and you need them! If you only know that r = a, then all you know is your point lies on that surface. You don't know \hat{r} until someone tells you the missing two (angular) components.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K