I Rate of change of ##L## in a rotating coordinate system

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the rate of change of a vector ##\mathbf{A}## in both inertial and rotating frames, highlighting the relationship between their time derivatives. It is established that for a vector independent of the coordinate system, the equation ##\left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{inertial} = \left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{rot} + \boldsymbol \omega \times \mathbf A## holds true. However, when considering the angular momentum vector ##\mathbf{L}##, it is argued that this relationship does not apply due to the dependency of ##\mathbf{L}## on the coordinate system, as its magnitude differs between stationary and rotating frames. The discussion suggests using the relation for angular momentum directly to verify results, emphasizing the distinction between vector components and vectors themselves. Overall, the applicability of the derived equation to angular momentum is contested based on its inherent properties.
Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
* We've a vector ##\mathbf{A}## lying in space, changing according to some rule.

* We introduce an inertial frame and find ##\left(\frac{d}{d t}
\mathbf{A} \right)_{i n}## in it.

* We also introduce a co located frame rotating with ##\mathbf{\omega}##. In this rotating frame I find ##\left(\frac{d}{d t}
\mathbf{A} \right)_{rot}##

* There exists a relationship between the two time rates as
##\left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{inertial} = \left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{rot} + \boldsymbol \omega \times \mathbf A##

* In all of this derivation it was assumed that the vector ##\mathbf{A}## was independent of the coordinate system. We merely observed the vector in two frames. The vector is independent of the coordinate system.----------------------------------
* Can we use the above equation on angular momentum vector ##\mathbf{L}## i.e ##\left ( \frac{d\mathbf L}{dt} \right )_\text{inertial} = \left ( \frac{d\mathbf L}{dt} \right )_\text{rot} + \boldsymbol \omega \times \mathbf L##?

I think no we can't.

In the derivation of the ##\left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{inertial} = \left ( \frac{d\mathbf A}{dt} \right )_\text{rot} + \boldsymbol \omega \times \mathbf A## we assumed that the vector ##\mathbf{A}## was independent of the coordinate system, its lengths and direction in space is independent of the coordinate system.

However for ##\mathbf{L}## that isn't the case.
##\mathbf{L}## has a different length in a stationary frame than in a rotating one. So the derivation doesn't apply.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
L=r \times p
\frac{dL}{dt}=\frac{dr}{dt} \times p + r \ \times \frac{dp}{dt}
Why don't you use this relation to check the result ?
 
Of course you can use the formula. The formula refers to the time derivative of polar or axial vector components (not vectors!).
 
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Back
Top