Covariant and Contravariant Transformation - Example of Polar Coordinates












0












$begingroup$


I would like to see the fact that the components of a vector transform differently (controvariant transformation) than the unit bases vectors (covariant transformation) for the specific case of cartesian to polar coordinate transformation.



The polar unit vectors $hat{r}$ and $hat{theta}$ can be expressed in terms of cartesian unit vectors, $hat{x}$ and $hat{y}$, as the following
begin{equation}
hat{r}= text{cos}phi hat{x} + text{sin}phi hat{y} \
hat{theta}= -text{sin}phi hat{x} + text{cos}phi hat{y} tag{1}
end{equation}



Any vector, $vec{V}$, can be expressed in the cartesian coordinate system as $vec{V}=V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}$. The same vector can be expressed in polar coordinates as $vec{V}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}$. We then have
begin{equation}
V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}. tag{2}
end{equation}
I then project both sides of (2) once onto $hat{r}$, and once onto $hat{theta}$. Using (1) and (2) we get
begin{equation}
V_r= text{cos}phi V_x+text{sin}phi V_y \
V_theta= -text{sin}phi V_x+text{cos}phi V_y tag{3}
end{equation}



Comparing (1) and (3), both the unit vectors and the components of a vector are transforming with the same rule, which is a contradiction! What am I missing here?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
    $endgroup$
    – MathforFun
    Apr 4 '18 at 16:11










  • $begingroup$
    You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:08










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
    $endgroup$
    – DosGatos
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:29












  • $begingroup$
    No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 18:15


















0












$begingroup$


I would like to see the fact that the components of a vector transform differently (controvariant transformation) than the unit bases vectors (covariant transformation) for the specific case of cartesian to polar coordinate transformation.



The polar unit vectors $hat{r}$ and $hat{theta}$ can be expressed in terms of cartesian unit vectors, $hat{x}$ and $hat{y}$, as the following
begin{equation}
hat{r}= text{cos}phi hat{x} + text{sin}phi hat{y} \
hat{theta}= -text{sin}phi hat{x} + text{cos}phi hat{y} tag{1}
end{equation}



Any vector, $vec{V}$, can be expressed in the cartesian coordinate system as $vec{V}=V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}$. The same vector can be expressed in polar coordinates as $vec{V}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}$. We then have
begin{equation}
V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}. tag{2}
end{equation}
I then project both sides of (2) once onto $hat{r}$, and once onto $hat{theta}$. Using (1) and (2) we get
begin{equation}
V_r= text{cos}phi V_x+text{sin}phi V_y \
V_theta= -text{sin}phi V_x+text{cos}phi V_y tag{3}
end{equation}



Comparing (1) and (3), both the unit vectors and the components of a vector are transforming with the same rule, which is a contradiction! What am I missing here?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
    $endgroup$
    – MathforFun
    Apr 4 '18 at 16:11










  • $begingroup$
    You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:08










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
    $endgroup$
    – DosGatos
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:29












  • $begingroup$
    No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 18:15
















0












0








0





$begingroup$


I would like to see the fact that the components of a vector transform differently (controvariant transformation) than the unit bases vectors (covariant transformation) for the specific case of cartesian to polar coordinate transformation.



The polar unit vectors $hat{r}$ and $hat{theta}$ can be expressed in terms of cartesian unit vectors, $hat{x}$ and $hat{y}$, as the following
begin{equation}
hat{r}= text{cos}phi hat{x} + text{sin}phi hat{y} \
hat{theta}= -text{sin}phi hat{x} + text{cos}phi hat{y} tag{1}
end{equation}



Any vector, $vec{V}$, can be expressed in the cartesian coordinate system as $vec{V}=V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}$. The same vector can be expressed in polar coordinates as $vec{V}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}$. We then have
begin{equation}
V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}. tag{2}
end{equation}
I then project both sides of (2) once onto $hat{r}$, and once onto $hat{theta}$. Using (1) and (2) we get
begin{equation}
V_r= text{cos}phi V_x+text{sin}phi V_y \
V_theta= -text{sin}phi V_x+text{cos}phi V_y tag{3}
end{equation}



Comparing (1) and (3), both the unit vectors and the components of a vector are transforming with the same rule, which is a contradiction! What am I missing here?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




I would like to see the fact that the components of a vector transform differently (controvariant transformation) than the unit bases vectors (covariant transformation) for the specific case of cartesian to polar coordinate transformation.



The polar unit vectors $hat{r}$ and $hat{theta}$ can be expressed in terms of cartesian unit vectors, $hat{x}$ and $hat{y}$, as the following
begin{equation}
hat{r}= text{cos}phi hat{x} + text{sin}phi hat{y} \
hat{theta}= -text{sin}phi hat{x} + text{cos}phi hat{y} tag{1}
end{equation}



Any vector, $vec{V}$, can be expressed in the cartesian coordinate system as $vec{V}=V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}$. The same vector can be expressed in polar coordinates as $vec{V}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}$. We then have
begin{equation}
V_x hat{x} + V_y hat{y}=V_r hat{r} + V_theta hat{theta}. tag{2}
end{equation}
I then project both sides of (2) once onto $hat{r}$, and once onto $hat{theta}$. Using (1) and (2) we get
begin{equation}
V_r= text{cos}phi V_x+text{sin}phi V_y \
V_theta= -text{sin}phi V_x+text{cos}phi V_y tag{3}
end{equation}



Comparing (1) and (3), both the unit vectors and the components of a vector are transforming with the same rule, which is a contradiction! What am I missing here?







linear-algebra differential-geometry linear-transformations






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Apr 4 '18 at 15:04









DosGatosDosGatos

1




1












  • $begingroup$
    Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
    $endgroup$
    – MathforFun
    Apr 4 '18 at 16:11










  • $begingroup$
    You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:08










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
    $endgroup$
    – DosGatos
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:29












  • $begingroup$
    No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 18:15




















  • $begingroup$
    Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
    $endgroup$
    – MathforFun
    Apr 4 '18 at 16:11










  • $begingroup$
    You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:08










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
    $endgroup$
    – DosGatos
    Apr 4 '18 at 17:29












  • $begingroup$
    No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Apr 4 '18 at 18:15


















$begingroup$
Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
$endgroup$
– MathforFun
Apr 4 '18 at 16:11




$begingroup$
Not sure if this is helpful, but a similar question has been posted here : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1068862/…
$endgroup$
– MathforFun
Apr 4 '18 at 16:11












$begingroup$
You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Apr 4 '18 at 17:08




$begingroup$
You're not missing anything. For an orthogonal matrix $A$, we have $(A^{-1})^top = A$, so it's going to be very difficult to see the difference.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Apr 4 '18 at 17:08












$begingroup$
@TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
$endgroup$
– DosGatos
Apr 4 '18 at 17:29






$begingroup$
@TedShifrin, I understand that $(A^{-1})^T=A$. However, if the transformation for the unit vectors, going from cartesian to polar coordinates, is $A$, don't you expect the matrix for the component transformation, again going from cartesian to polar system, to be $A^{-1}=A^T$?
$endgroup$
– DosGatos
Apr 4 '18 at 17:29














$begingroup$
No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Apr 4 '18 at 18:15






$begingroup$
No, a transpose comes in there, as well, essentially because of duality. Write it out carefully for a general transformation.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Apr 4 '18 at 18:15












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

As @TedShifrin pointed out, the correct transformation for the dual is $(A^{-1})^T$.



For instance, in special relativity contravariant vectors transform as



$ V^{mu '} = Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} V^{nu}$,



where $ Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} $ is the Lorentz transformation taking component from the unprimed frame to the primed frame. For covariant components we have to use the inverse of the Lorentz transformation:



$ V_{mu '} = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^{nu } _{,mu '} V_{nu}$.



If we assume that $V'$ and $V$ are column vectors representing, $ V_{mu '}$ and $V_{nu}$, respectively. Then in matrix format we have:



$ V' = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^T V$.



This can also be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation



Of course, one can get to the same conclusion in the context of group theory. If the vector $x$ transforms according to $x rightarrow x'=Ax$ where $A$ is the group member. Then the dual $tilde{x}$ transforms as $tilde{x} rightarrow tilde{x} '= big(A^{-1} big)^Ttilde{x}$ so that $tilde{x}^T x$ is an invariant in all frames.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2721992%2fcovariant-and-contravariant-transformation-example-of-polar-coordinates%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    As @TedShifrin pointed out, the correct transformation for the dual is $(A^{-1})^T$.



    For instance, in special relativity contravariant vectors transform as



    $ V^{mu '} = Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} V^{nu}$,



    where $ Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} $ is the Lorentz transformation taking component from the unprimed frame to the primed frame. For covariant components we have to use the inverse of the Lorentz transformation:



    $ V_{mu '} = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^{nu } _{,mu '} V_{nu}$.



    If we assume that $V'$ and $V$ are column vectors representing, $ V_{mu '}$ and $V_{nu}$, respectively. Then in matrix format we have:



    $ V' = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^T V$.



    This can also be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation



    Of course, one can get to the same conclusion in the context of group theory. If the vector $x$ transforms according to $x rightarrow x'=Ax$ where $A$ is the group member. Then the dual $tilde{x}$ transforms as $tilde{x} rightarrow tilde{x} '= big(A^{-1} big)^Ttilde{x}$ so that $tilde{x}^T x$ is an invariant in all frames.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      As @TedShifrin pointed out, the correct transformation for the dual is $(A^{-1})^T$.



      For instance, in special relativity contravariant vectors transform as



      $ V^{mu '} = Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} V^{nu}$,



      where $ Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} $ is the Lorentz transformation taking component from the unprimed frame to the primed frame. For covariant components we have to use the inverse of the Lorentz transformation:



      $ V_{mu '} = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^{nu } _{,mu '} V_{nu}$.



      If we assume that $V'$ and $V$ are column vectors representing, $ V_{mu '}$ and $V_{nu}$, respectively. Then in matrix format we have:



      $ V' = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^T V$.



      This can also be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation



      Of course, one can get to the same conclusion in the context of group theory. If the vector $x$ transforms according to $x rightarrow x'=Ax$ where $A$ is the group member. Then the dual $tilde{x}$ transforms as $tilde{x} rightarrow tilde{x} '= big(A^{-1} big)^Ttilde{x}$ so that $tilde{x}^T x$ is an invariant in all frames.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        As @TedShifrin pointed out, the correct transformation for the dual is $(A^{-1})^T$.



        For instance, in special relativity contravariant vectors transform as



        $ V^{mu '} = Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} V^{nu}$,



        where $ Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} $ is the Lorentz transformation taking component from the unprimed frame to the primed frame. For covariant components we have to use the inverse of the Lorentz transformation:



        $ V_{mu '} = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^{nu } _{,mu '} V_{nu}$.



        If we assume that $V'$ and $V$ are column vectors representing, $ V_{mu '}$ and $V_{nu}$, respectively. Then in matrix format we have:



        $ V' = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^T V$.



        This can also be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation



        Of course, one can get to the same conclusion in the context of group theory. If the vector $x$ transforms according to $x rightarrow x'=Ax$ where $A$ is the group member. Then the dual $tilde{x}$ transforms as $tilde{x} rightarrow tilde{x} '= big(A^{-1} big)^Ttilde{x}$ so that $tilde{x}^T x$ is an invariant in all frames.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        As @TedShifrin pointed out, the correct transformation for the dual is $(A^{-1})^T$.



        For instance, in special relativity contravariant vectors transform as



        $ V^{mu '} = Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} V^{nu}$,



        where $ Lambda ^{mu '} _{,nu} $ is the Lorentz transformation taking component from the unprimed frame to the primed frame. For covariant components we have to use the inverse of the Lorentz transformation:



        $ V_{mu '} = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^{nu } _{,mu '} V_{nu}$.



        If we assume that $V'$ and $V$ are column vectors representing, $ V_{mu '}$ and $V_{nu}$, respectively. Then in matrix format we have:



        $ V' = big( Lambda^{-1} big)^T V$.



        This can also be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation



        Of course, one can get to the same conclusion in the context of group theory. If the vector $x$ transforms according to $x rightarrow x'=Ax$ where $A$ is the group member. Then the dual $tilde{x}$ transforms as $tilde{x} rightarrow tilde{x} '= big(A^{-1} big)^Ttilde{x}$ so that $tilde{x}^T x$ is an invariant in all frames.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 2 at 2:27









        DosGatosDosGatos

        1




        1






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2721992%2fcovariant-and-contravariant-transformation-example-of-polar-coordinates%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to send String Array data to Server using php in android

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

            Is anime1.com a legal site for watching anime?