Why is there a wiwj at the end in the kinetic energy expression?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression for kinetic energy in relation to angular momentum, specifically questioning the presence of the terms \( \omega_i \omega_j \) rather than just \( \omega_i^2 \). Participants explore the implications of the inertia tensor and its symmetry, as well as draw parallels to other expressions in physics, such as those involving electric fields and polarization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why the kinetic energy expression includes \( \omega_i \omega_j \) instead of just \( \omega_i^2 \), seeking clarification on this point.
  • Another participant notes that in general, bodies are not isotropic, leading to non-zero off-diagonal elements in the inertia tensor \( I_{ij} \), which may explain the inclusion of both \( \omega_i \) and \( \omega_j \).
  • A subsequent reply reiterates the non-isotropic nature of bodies and the symmetry of the inertia tensor, suggesting that one can choose coordinate axes to simplify the expression.
  • Participants draw an analogy to the expression for second-order polarization, questioning why terms like \( E_x E_y \) are included when the electric field has a specific direction.
  • It is mentioned that a quadratic expression in \( \omega \) will generally take the form \( I_{ij} \omega_i \omega_j \), and that in a special coordinate system, the inertia tensor can be diagonalized.
  • One participant questions whether the same diagonalization applies to the polarization expression, indicating uncertainty about the generalizability of the concept.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the implications if the tensor cannot be diagonalized.
  • A later reply confirms that the presence of \( \omega_i \omega_j \) is due to the distinct indices \( i \) and \( j \), clarifying that terms like \( \omega_x \omega_y \) are not included in the sum over \( \omega_i^2 \).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the initial question regarding the kinetic energy expression, as multiple viewpoints and uncertainties are presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the inertia tensor's properties and their relation to the expressions discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on the choice of coordinate systems and the symmetry of the inertia tensor, indicating that these factors may influence the interpretation of the expressions. There is also mention of unresolved questions regarding the diagonalization of tensors in different contexts.

Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0
Hi

If i want to express the kinetic energy for some angular momentum, I can write

<br /> T=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}{I_{ij}\omega_i\omega_j}<br />

I cannot quite see why we have wiwj at the end, and not just wi2. It is not that obvious to me. I have read several examples regarding polarization and electric fields, and they make perfectly good sense. But in the case with the KE, I'm a little confused. Can somebody perhaps shed some light on this?Niles.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general bodies are not isotropic and coordinate axis are arbitrary, so I_{ij} =/= 0, i =/= j.
But since I_{ij} = I_{ji}, you can always choose axis in such a way that I_{ij} = 0, i =/= j.
 
quZz said:
In general bodies are not isotropic and coordinate axis are arbitrary, so I_{ij} =/= 0, i =/= j.
But since I_{ij} = I_{ji}, you can always choose axis in such a way that I_{ij} = 0, i =/= j.

Thanks. But does that also explain why wiwj at the end, and not just wi2?
 
Or e.g. another example: Why is it that we have two different factors of E in the expression for the second-order polarization?

<br /> P_i^{(2)} = \sum_{jk}{\chi_{ijk}E_jE_k}<br />

What I cannot understand in this case is that the electric field comes in with a certain direction, so why do we even consider elements such as ExEy?
 
In general, the expression quadratic in \omega will have the form I_{ij}\omega_{i}\omega_{j}.

Since I_{ij} is symmetric you can choose a special coordinate system where it is diagonal. In this special case you will have I_{11}\omega_1^2 + I_{22}\omega_2^2 + I_{33}\omega_3^2.
 
In the case with

<br /> <br /> P_i^{(2)} = \sum_{jk}{\chi_{ijk}E_jE_k}<br /> <br />

can we also always represent the choose a coordinate system where x it is diagonal?
 
don't know =) but what if not?
 
Niles said:
Thanks. But does that also explain why wiwj at the end, and not just wi2?
Sure it does. The i and j are different and terms like wxwy are not part of the sum over wi².
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K