Center of mass prob. with sigma notation, vectors

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equation for the magnitude R of the position vector for the center of mass using sigma notation and vectors. The user is attempting to derive the equation by dotting the position vector with itself to obtain R² and is unsure about handling the indices during the dot product. They are exploring whether to sum over the same index or different indices and how to simplify the resulting expressions. The user also reflects on their uncertainty regarding summation rules in conjunction with vector operations. The conversation highlights the challenges of applying mathematical concepts in a complex proof involving vectors and summation notation.
gn0m0n
Messages
33
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Prove the magnitude R of the position vector \vec{R} for the center of mass from an arbitrary point of origin is given by the equation

M^{2}R^{2} = M\sum{m_{i}r^{2}_{i} - \frac{1}{2}\sum{m_{i}m_{j}r_{ij}^{2}



Homework Equations



\vec{R} = \frac{1}{M} \sum{m_{i}\vec{r}_{i}

M=\sum{m_{i}

\vec{r}_{ij} = \vec{r}_i - \vec{r}_j

The Attempt at a Solution



OK, the simplest thing to start with is to simply dot \vec{R} with itself to get the magnitude R^{2} and then bring over M^{2} to the LHS. However, I'm not sure how to handle the dotting/squaring with the indices.

Would it be

M^{2}R^{2} = \sum{m_{i}\vec{r}_{i} \bullet \sum{m_{i}\vec{r}_{i}

OR

M^{2}R^{2} = \sum{m_{i}\vec{r}_{i} \bullet \sum{m_{j}\vec{r}_{j} ?

Can I then simplify that by bringing terms out of the summation, or the dot product inside?

My recollection of the summation rules is a bit fuzzy. Actually, I'm not sure I've used the summation notation along with vector operations before.

I've tried writing the squared magnitudes in the desired answer as dot products, too, which allowed me to do a lot of rewriting but I can't connect the givens to the answer yet.

I.e.,
r^{2}_{i} = \vec{r}_{i} \bullet\vec{r}_{i}
r^{2}_{ij} = \vec{r}_{ij} \bullet\vec{r}_{ij} = (\vec{r}_{i}-\vec{r}_{j}) \bullet (\vec{r}_{i}-\vec{r}_{j}) = \vec{r}_{i} \bullet\vec{r}_{i} - 2\vec{r}_{i} \bullet\vec{r}_{j} + \vec{r}_{j} \bullet\vec{r}_{j}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry that looks kind of rough, I'm no expert at TeX.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top