Polar coordinates in mecanics?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the polar coordinate unit vectors ir and iθ in mechanics. The formulas ir = cosθ . i + sinθ . j and iθ = -sinθ . i + cosθ . j are derived from the need for these vectors to be perpendicular, ensuring their dot product equals zero. The choice of coordinate system affects the representation of these vectors, and while variations are possible, they must maintain perpendicularity. Clarifications are made regarding the reflection of vectors, emphasizing that -cosθ . i + sinθ . j represents a reflection in the y-axis, not the x-axis. Proper visualization of the coordinate system is crucial before solving mechanics problems.
Patrick.Gh
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Ok, here is my problem. I haven't taken anything vector related since at least one year ago. And back then, I wasn't such a good student.. So now my past has come back to haunt me..
I still have some basic notions, but other than that, I pretty much forgot things..

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/8378/mec1wi0.jpg
Can someone please explain to me why ir = cosθ . i + sinθ . j and iθ = -sinθ.i + cosθ. j ?

Why isn't for example iθ = -cosθ.i + sinθ.j?
Our teacher told us that these two are formulas. Or do they vary in each case?

(ir, iθ, i and j are vectors.)

Thanks in advance for your help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, it depends on how you choose your coordinate system. First of all, you want the unit vectors in the r and theta direction to be perpendicular to each other, and the one in the r-direction to point along the line from the origin O to M(t).
Now normally, one would choose the unit vector i along the x-axis, and j along the y-axis. Of course, for theta = 0, you see that the r-unit vector should just be i, and theta- unit vector should be along j. If you plug in theta = 0 in the sine and cosine, you will see that one of the two definitions you gave comes out wrong.

Of course, you are free to choose your i and j vectors differently (for example, i along the y-axis and j along the -x or +x-axis is a possibility, although it goes against the conventions) and you would find another expression for i_theta and i_r. That is why, before solving any mechanics problem, you should always draw a picture with all the relevant basis vectors in it, so no confusion may arise about how you set up the coordinate system.
 
Hi Patrick.Gh! :smile:
Patrick.Gh said:
Ok, here is my problem. I haven't taken anything vector related since at least one year ago. And back then, I wasn't such a good student.. So now my past has come back to haunt me..

ooh … scary! :eek:
Can someone please explain to me why ir = cosθ . i + sinθ . j and iθ = -sinθ.i + cosθ. j ?

Why isn't for example iθ = -cosθ.i + sinθ.j?

-cosθ.i + sinθ.j is the reflection of cosθ.i + sinθ.j in the x-axis.

you want the perpendicular vector, so you want their dot-product to be zero … in this case, (cosθ . i + sinθ . j).(-sinθ.i + cosθ. j) = cosθsinθ - sinθcosθ = 0. :smile:
 
tiny-tim said:
Hi Patrick.Gh! :smile:


ooh … scary! :eek:

I don't know why I have this feeling you are being sarcastic :P Maybe because I'm usually sarcastic, or I have been over dramatic in the post :D

tiny-tim said:
-cosθ.i + sinθ.j is the reflection of cosθ.i + sinθ.j in the x-axis.

you want the perpendicular vector, so you want their dot-product to be zero … in this case, (cosθ . i + sinθ . j).(-sinθ.i + cosθ. j) = cosθsinθ - sinθcosθ = 0. :smile:

I see. So if iθ is in the opposite direction, it would still be -sinθ.i + cosθ. j since it's still perpendicular?
 
No, tiny-tim is never sarcastic (he's much nicer than I am). He really meant it!

He does, however, seem to me to be wrong about one point: -cos(\theta)i+ sin(<br /> \theta)j is the reflection of cos(\theta)i+ sin(\theta)j in the y-axis, not the x-axis. the y coordinate is the same, sin(\theta) in both, only the x coordinate, cos(\theta) is negated. That's a reflection in the y-axis.
 
HallsofIvy said:
[...] That's a reflection in the y-axis.
Which is consistent with the image you posted.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top