What Factors Affect the Direction of a Unit Tangent Vector in 3D?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of the unit tangent vector in 3D space, specifically addressing whether its direction is influenced by the way a curve is traced. It is established that the unit tangent vector, defined as \(\frac{\vec{r}'(t)}{|\vec{r}'(t)|}\), is indeed dependent on the direction of the curve when the parameterization changes. The example of a ball on a string illustrates that reversing the parameterization results in a unit tangent vector that is parallel but points in the opposite direction. The importance of continuity in the curve's parameterization is also emphasized.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically derivatives of vector functions.
  • Familiarity with unit vectors and their properties.
  • Knowledge of parameterization of curves in 3D space.
  • Basic proficiency in LaTeX for mathematical typesetting.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of vector derivatives in depth, focusing on their geometric interpretations.
  • Explore the implications of curve parameterization on tangent vectors and curvature.
  • Learn about the continuity and differentiability of vector functions in 3D.
  • Practice LaTeX formatting for mathematical expressions to avoid common errors.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are dealing with vector calculus, particularly those interested in the geometric properties of curves in three-dimensional space.

Stevecgz
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Unit tangent vector in 3D - and what am I doing wrong with latex?

Question: At a given point on a curve, does the unit tangent vector given by
\frac{\vec{r}'(t)}{|\vec{r}'(t)|}
depend on the direction in which the curve is being swept out?

My initial thought on this was that the unit tangent vector didn't depend on direction because it only depends on t. But now I am thinking that it would matter, but only in the case that \vec{r}(t) was not continuous at t. Any thoughts or advice?

Thanks,
Steve

And what am I doing wrong that latex isn't working?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Think about what you mean by "direction in which the curve is swept out," if you mean what I think you mean (or at least what *I* think it means :wink:) then it's basically the definition of the derivative, i.e. how r(t) is changing with time.
 
dicerandom said:
Think about what you mean by "direction in which the curve is swept out," if you mean what I think you mean (or at least what *I* think it means :wink:) then it's basically the definition of the derivative, i.e. how r(t) is changing with time.


The derivative is independent of the direction which the curve is traced out, right?
 
No, that's equivalent to saying that velocity is independent of the direction of motion. The magnitude of the derivative, i.e. the speed, doesn't depend on direction, but the actual vector quantity of velocity does.

Consider the simple example of a ball which is on the end of a string fixed to the origin. If the ball is going around the origin counter-clockwise with a frequency \omega then its position is:

\vec{r}(t) = \cos(\omega t) \hat{x} + \sin(\omega t) \hat{y}

And its velocity is:

\vec{r^\prime}(t) = - \omega \sin(\omega t) \hat{x} + \omega \cos(\omega t) \hat{y}

If you want the ball to go around the other direction just replace t with -t and I think you will be able to see that the velocity vectors point in opposite directions.
 
Last edited:
Stevecgz, I corrected your Latex- you were using [\tex] to end when it should be [/tex].
 
dicerandom said:
No, that's equivalent to saying that velocity is independent of the direction of motion. The magnitude of the derivative, i.e. the speed, doesn't depend on direction, but the actual vector quantity of velocity does.

Consider the simple example of a ball which is on the end of a string fixed to the origin. If the ball is going around the origin counter-clockwise with a frequency \omega then its position is:

\vec{r}(t) = \cos(\omega t) \hat{x} + \sin(\omega t) \hat{y}

And its velocity is:

\vec{r^\prime}(t) = - \omega \sin(\omega t) \hat{x} + \omega \cos(\omega t) \hat{y}

If you want the ball to go around the other direction just replace t with -t and I think you will be able to see that the velocity vectors point in opposite directions.

Thanks for the reply dicerandom. I think I understand your analogy. So would I be correct in saying that for any given point on a space curve if the direction that the curve is being swept out changes than the new unit tangent vector for that point will be parallel to and of the same magnitude as the previous unit vector, but in the opposite direction?


Thanks HallsofIvy for fixing my tex tags.
 
Yes, although you already know it has the same magnitude because it is a unit vector. If it weren't a unit vector then it might not have the same magnitude if the curve is not parametrized with the same speed, but it would still be parallel and in the opposite direction.
 
0rthodontist said:
Yes, although you already know it has the same magnitude because it is a unit vector. If it weren't a unit vector then it might not have the same magnitude if the curve is not parametrized with the same speed, but it would still be parallel and in the opposite direction.

Right... unit vectors always have a magnitude of one. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
3K