Vector squared in polar coordinates

In summary, the confusion arises when trying to write the modulus of a vector in polar coordinates, as it is not simply r(dot) but also includes an extra term with θ(dot). Therefore, when writing the kinetic energy of a point particle in polar coordinates, it is important to include this extra term and write it as (1/2)m r(dot)2 + (1/2)m r2θ(dot)2 instead of (1/2)m r(dot)2.
  • #1
dyn
773
62
Hi
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus but when it comes to the kinetic energy term for a particle in plane polar coordinates I'm confused ( i apologise here as i don't know how to write time derivative with the dot on top).
In this case you get
r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
which doesn't seem to fit with Equation 1. I know how to derive this equation but i.m confused as to why it doesn't fit with Equation 1
Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
dyn said:
Hi
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus but when it comes to the kinetic energy term for a particle in plane polar coordinates I'm confused ( i apologise here as i don't know how to write time derivative with the dot on top).
In this case you get
r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
which doesn't seem to fit with Equation 1. I know how to derive this equation but i.m confused as to why it doesn't fit with Equation 1
Thanks
What doesn't fit? In Cartesian cordinates we have: $$\mathbf{\dot r}^2 = \dot x^2 + \dot y^2$$
 
  • #3
If we have a vector ##\vec{a}=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)## in Cartesian coordinates, then the "multiplication with itself", i.e. the scalar product with itself represents the scalar ##\vec{a} \cdot \vec{a}^\tau=\sum_{i=1}^n a_i^2.##

In case ##\vec{a}=\vec{r} \cdot \cos\varphi ## is given in polar coordinates, we get ##\vec{a}\cdot\vec{a}^\tau=\vec{r}\cdot\vec{r}^\tau \cdot \cos^2\varphi .##
 
  • #4
dyn said:
I was always under the impression that i could write
a2 = a.a = a2 Equation 1

where a⋅ is a vector and a is its modulus

Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
 
  • #5
dyn said:
Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
Depends on whether you manage to make it a correct equation. Neither bold and non-bold letters nor the dot has been defined. It is guesswork when we read it as ##\vec{a}\cdot\vec{a}^\tau.##
 
  • #6
dyn said:
Is Equation 1 above always valid or only valid in certain circumstances ?
Equation 1 is a definition, so yes.
 
  • #7
If equation 1 is always correct ; then in polar coordinates it should ber(dot)2 = r(dot)2 Equation A

but actually the correct equation is r(dot)2 = r(dot)2 + r2θ(dot)2
I understand how to derive this but my question is ; if equation 1 is correct why is Equation A not correct ?
 
  • #8
Well, simply. Because the derivative of the module is not the module of the derivative.
To help visualize let's change a little the notation, let's say we have a vector ##\vec{r}## and we define it time derivative ##\vec{v} = \frac{d\vec{r}}{d t}##.
Then its true that
$$r^2 = \vec{r}\cdot \vec{r} = \vec{r}^2, \qquad v^2= \vec{v}\cdot \vec{v} = \vec{v}^2$$
which is your "equation 1". What it's not true though is
$$v = \frac{dr}{dt}$$
understanding the symbol without an arrow as the module.
What the "equation A" is telling you is that
$$v^2 = \left(\frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 + r^2 \left(\frac{d\theta}{dt}\right)^2$$
 
  • Like
Likes dyn and PeroK
  • #9
Thanks for your replies. I think I'm having a bit of a brain freeze on this at the moment
 
  • #10
dyn said:
Thanks for your replies. I think I'm having a bit of a brain freeze on this at the moment
First, if we use the dot product then there is no confusion about what ##\mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}## means. We also recognise this as the magnitude squared of the vector, which we can write as: $$|\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ It's also common to drop the modulus symbols and write: $$\mathbf{\dot r}^2 \equiv |\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ Finally, it's common to write the modulus of a vector not in boldface, so we write:$$v^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r}^2 \equiv |\mathbf{\dot r}|^2 \equiv \mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}$$ Where we have essentially defined $$v \equiv \sqrt{\mathbf{\dot r} \cdot \mathbf{\dot r}}$$
Now, there is a point over which we must be careful, because we also have: $$r \equiv \sqrt{\mathbf{r} \cdot \mathbf{r}}$$ And, of course, we can take the derivative of that: $$\dot{r} \equiv \frac{dr}{dt} = \frac{d}{dt} \sqrt{\mathbf{r} \cdot \mathbf{r}}$$ And now we must be careful as $$\dot r \ne v$$ For example, in Cartesian coordinates we have: $$v = \sqrt{\dot x^2 + \dot y^2 + \dot z^2}$$ and $$\dot r = \frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2}$$ Which are clearly not the same thing.
 
  • Like
Likes dyn
  • #11
I think my confusion comes from the point that usually we write the modulus of vector a as a but in polar coordinates the modulus of vector r(dot) is not r(dot). It contains an extra term with θ(dot) in it
Hence when writing the kinetic energy of a point particle i should write (1/2)m r(dot)2 and not write it as (1/2)m r(dot)2 as that is not correct in polar coordinates
 

FAQ: Vector squared in polar coordinates

What is a vector squared in polar coordinates?

A vector squared in polar coordinates is a mathematical representation of a vector quantity using polar coordinates. It is expressed as a magnitude (represented by the length of the vector) and a direction (represented by the angle between the vector and a reference line).

How do you convert a vector squared from Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates?

To convert a vector squared from Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates, you can use the following formulas:
Magnitude (r) = √(x^2 + y^2)
Angle (θ) = tan^-1 (y/x)

What is the relationship between a vector squared in polar coordinates and a vector squared in Cartesian coordinates?

A vector squared in polar coordinates and a vector squared in Cartesian coordinates represent the same vector, but in different coordinate systems. The polar coordinates system is useful for representing vectors that have a direction and magnitude, while the Cartesian coordinates system is useful for representing vectors that have x and y components.

What are the advantages of using polar coordinates to represent a vector squared?

One advantage of using polar coordinates is that it allows for a more intuitive representation of direction and magnitude. It also simplifies calculations involving trigonometric functions. Additionally, polar coordinates are useful for representing circular or rotational motion.

Can a vector squared in polar coordinates have negative values?

Yes, a vector squared in polar coordinates can have negative values. The magnitude (r) can be negative if the vector is pointing in the opposite direction of the reference line, and the angle (θ) can be negative if the vector is in the third or fourth quadrant.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top