Student request: change notations. Mine seem better than the book's, though. I think the books exposition (p207-210) is very confusing, partly by not using vector symbols to indicate vectors versus coordinates. I suggest you stick with my exposition.
To solve problems, it is often desirable or essential to change basis.
As an example, consider the vector of gravity . If I use a
Cartesian coordinate system
with the x-axis
horizontal, the vector
will be along the negative y-axis.
I will call this coordinate system, (
), the E-system.
Using the E-system, I can write the vector as:
But if, say, the ground is under an angle with the
horizontal, it might be much more convenient to use a coordinate
system E*, (
), with the x-axis aligned with the
ground:
What if I need to change the coordinates of a lot of vectors from one coordinate system to the other? Is there a systematic way of doing this? The answer is yes; the following formula applies:
In particular,
Let's test it: P times the coordinates of vector in the E*-system
should give the coordinates in the E-system:
Matrix P is called the transformation matrix from E to E*. Note however that it really transforms coordinates in the E*-system to coordinates in the E-system. You just have to get used to that language: a transformation matrix from A to B transforms B coordinates into A coordinates. No, I do not know who thought of that first.
What if you really want to transform E coordinates into E* coordinates? No big deal: just multiply by the inverse matrix P-1.