Codex @codex  0

The Coriolis acceleration is the Coriolis force divided by the particle's mass:It is therefore independent of mass for a specified relative velocity and angular velocity. This is one contribution to the acceleration measured in a rotating reference frame. For a fixed common origin with an inertial frame and constant $\mathbf{\Omega }$, the full equation of motion in a rotating frame isAll vectors here are expressed in the rotating axes; ${\mathbf{F}}_{\mathrm{real}}$ is the sum of actual forces. An accelerating origin adds a translational apparent force, and time-dependent angular velocity also adds the Euler acceleration.

The factor two follows directly from the rotating-frame derivative formula. First ${\mathbf{v}}_{\mathrm{lab}}={\dot{\mathbf{r}}}_{\mathrm{rot}}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{r}$. Differentiate again in the inertial frame: differentiating ${\dot{\mathbf{r}}}_{\mathrm{rot}}$ contributes one $\mathbf{\Omega }\times {\dot{\mathbf{r}}}_{\mathrm{rot}}$, and differentiating $\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{r}$ contributes another. Move both terms to the rotating side of Newton's second law to obtain the minus sign and the factor two. The centrifugal acceleration comes from the remaining double cross product.

Use $D=(d/dt{)}_S$, $D^{\prime }=(d/dt{)}_{S^{\prime }}$, and ${\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }=D^{\prime }\mathbf{r}$. By the rotating-frame derivative formula, $D\mathbf{r}={\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }+\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{r}$. Apply the product rule for the cross product and the same rotating-frame derivative formula again:We have $D{\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }=D^{\prime }{\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }+\mathbf{\omega }\times {\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }$ and $D\mathbf{\omega }=D^{\prime }\mathbf{\omega }$, since $\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{\omega }=0$. ThereforeRearranging this identity into an equation of motion in a rotating frame produces the apparent Coriolis acceleration, Euler acceleration and centrifugal acceleration, with signs opposite to their corresponding terms on the right of this inertial acceleration identity. No translational term is needed because the two origins coincide.

Let ${\mathbf{e}}_1^{\prime }(t),{\mathbf{e}}_2^{\prime }(t),{\mathbf{e}}_3^{\prime }(t)$ be an orthonormal basis fixed in the rotating reference frame $S^{\prime }$. A small rotation through $\mathbf{\omega }dt$ changes each basis vector by $\mathbf{\omega }\times {\mathbf{e}}_j^{\prime }dt$, so its derivative in the inertial frame isWrite the arbitrary vector as $\mathbf{a}={\sum }_j{a}_j(t){\mathbf{e}}_j^{\prime }(t)$. Differentiating the components and the moving basis separately givesThis proves the rotating-frame derivative formula, including when the angular velocity varies with time.

Apply the rotating-frame derivative formula first to position and then to its inertial velocity:The angular velocity is constant, so there is no term involving $\dot{\mathbf{\omega }}$. By Newton's second law in the inertial frame, the inertial acceleration is $\mathbf{F}/m$. Rearrangement gives the equation of motion in a rotating frame:The two additional accelerations are the Coriolis acceleration and centrifugal acceleration.

Apply the rotating-frame derivative formula first to $r$, then to $v^{\prime }=[dr/dt{]}_{S^{\prime }}$. Since the angular velocity is constant in either frame,The two apparent forces in the rotating equation are the Coriolis force and the centrifugal acceleration multiplied by mass. ThusSet ${\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\varphi -\frac{m}{2}|\omega \times r{|}^2$. The supplied gradient identity gives $\nabla {\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\nabla \varphi +m\omega \times (\omega \times r)$. Taking the scalar product with $v^{\prime }$ removes $G$, since it is orthogonal to $v^{\prime }$, and removes the Coriolis force. Therefore the energy balance in a uniformly rotating frame isThe displayed quantity is conserved when the potential is stationary in the rotating coordinates. This includes a static inertial potential invariant under rotations about the chosen axis, such as vertical gravity in part (b). If the word conservative only means a time-independent inertial potential, that extra rotational invariance is needed; a conservative force alone does not imply the claimed conservation.

For an explicit counterexample to that unrestricted interpretation, take unit mass, an inertial force $F=e_x$, $\varphi =-x$, no $G$, rotation $\omega =\omega e_z$, and inertial trajectory $r(t)=(t^2/2,1,0)$ with initial velocity zero. It satisfies Newton's second law. Substituting $v^{\prime }=\dot{r}-\omega \times r$ into the proposed energy gives $E=\omega t$, which is not constant for nonzero rotation. The qualified conservation law above is the one used for the hoop.

For any vector $\mathbf{a}$, differentiating its components and the rotating basis gives the rotating-frame derivative formulaApply it twice to the position $\mathbf{x}$, with constant angular velocity $\mathbf{\omega }$. The inertial acceleration iswhere dots denote rotating-frame derivatives. Newton's second law therefore becomesThe last terms are the Coriolis force and the force corresponding to centrifugal acceleration.

For the particle on a uniformly rotating inclined plane, choose orthonormal vectors ${\mathbf{e}}_1$ along the horizontal $\xi$ axis and ${\mathbf{e}}_2$ up the slope, and set ${\mathbf{e}}_3={\mathbf{e}}_1\times {\mathbf{e}}_2$, the upward normal vector. Then ${\mathbf{e}}_z=\sin \theta {\mathbf{e}}_2+\cos \theta {\mathbf{e}}_3$ andHere $N$ is the normal reaction. The marble is modeled as the smooth sliding particle specified by the printed equations, without an additional rolling constraint. The rotating-frame Coriolis acceleration and centrifugal acceleration are respectivelyThe normal rotating-frame acceleration is zero, so the normal reaction is not generally $mg\cos \theta$; it satisfiesProjecting the same equation onto the two tangential axes gives exactly

Multiply the equations by $\dot{\xi }$ and $\dot{\eta }$ and add. The Coriolis force terms cancel, as expected because this force does no work relative to the rotating frame. The normal reaction also does no work along the plane. The conserved quantity is rotating-frame kinetic energy plus gravitational and centrifugal potential energy:This need not be the conserved inertial energy, since the externally driven rotating plane can exchange energy with the particle.

The rotating-frame derivative formula is $(d\mathbf{A}/dt{)}_S=(d\mathbf{A}/dt{)}_{S^{\prime }}+\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{A}$. Applying it twice to the position vector, with constant angular velocity, givesSolving for ${\mathbf{a}}_{S^{\prime }}$ identifies the displayed terms: its left side is the acceleration relative to the rotating reference frame, the first right-hand term is the inertial acceleration, $-2\mathbf{\omega }\times {\mathbf{v}}_{S^{\prime }}$ is the Coriolis acceleration, and $-\mathbf{\omega }\times (\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{r})$ is the outward centrifugal acceleration.

For a particle of mass $m$, replace ${\mathbf{a}}_S$ by the actual force divided by $m$ using Newton's second law. The remaining terms then appear as apparent forces in $S^{\prime }$. There is no Euler acceleration because $\mathbf{\omega }$ is constant and no translational acceleration term because the common origin is fixed in the inertial frame.

Let $\{{\mathbf{e}}_i(t)\}$ be an orthonormal basis fixed in $S^{\prime }$ and write $\mathbf{a}=a_i{\mathbf{e}}_i$. A basis vector rotating with angular velocity $\mathbf{\omega }$ satisfiesDifferentiating the components and the basis vectors in $S$ therefore gives the rotating-frame derivative formula

Changing basis and acceleration. Attach orthonormal unit vectors ${\mathbf{e}}_i(t)$ to the rotating frame, with a common origin fixed in the inertial frame. An infinitesimal rotation $d\mathbf{\theta }=\mathbf{\omega }dt$ changes a vector fixed in those axes by $d\mathbf{A}=d\mathbf{\theta }\times \mathbf{A}$: its tip moves tangentially to the circle about the rotation axis. More generally, write $\mathbf{A}={\sum }_i{A}_i{\mathbf{e}}_i$. Differentiating the components and the rotating basis separately proves the rotating-frame derivative formula,

Apply the formula first to position: ${\dot{\mathbf{r}}}_0=\mathbf{v}+\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{r}$, where $\mathbf{v}=(d\mathbf{r}/dt{)}_S$. Apply it again to both terms. For constant $\mathbf{\omega }$,One cross term comes from differentiating $\mathbf{v}$ in the inertial frame and another from differentiating $\mathbf{r}$ in $\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{r}$. The displayed source formula implicitly requires constant angular velocity and an unaccelerated common origin. For changing rotation rate there is also $\dot{\mathbf{\omega }}\times \mathbf{r}$; an accelerating origin supplies its own translational acceleration. Moving the rotation terms to the force side gives the apparent Coriolis force and centrifugal force with negative signs.

Southward motion on Earth. Use local east, north and up axes, with latitude $\lambda$ positive northward. Then $\mathbf{\Omega }=\Omega (0,\cos \lambda ,\sin \lambda )$ and $\mathbf{v}=(0,-v,0)$. The Coriolis acceleration in local Earth coordinates givesIt is westward in the northern hemisphere, eastward in the southern hemisphere and zero for exactly southward motion at the equator. There is no vertical Coriolis component for this particular velocity.

Correct steering. On the desired meridional track, drag has no eastward component because it is antiparallel to the velocity. If the thrust makes signed angle $\varphi$ east of south, its eastward component is $T\sin \varphi$. The cross-track force balance is thereforesoThe argument must have magnitude at most one for this simple thrust-only correction to be feasible. The signed angle changes sign at the equator: correction is east of south in the north and west of south in the south. Thus the phrase “east of south” cannot describe a positive correction throughout the entire flight.

Wrong-sign correction and the miss distance. A literally constant velocity vector cannot develop a cross-track displacement. The physically useful interpretation of the last task is constant speed, with an erroneous lateral steering correction. In the usual leading-track model, thrust and drag balance along the actual motion, and the applied transverse correction has the correct magnitude but the wrong sign. It therefore reinforces rather than cancels the Coriolis force. Starting at the equator, use the unperturbed southward track $\lambda \simeq -vt/R$, and let $x_E$ be the eastward departure from that track. To first order in the departure,There is a factor two relative to uncompensated Coriolis deflection because the wrong correction adds an equal lateral force. Integration gives the wrong-sign Coriolis steering error,For southern angular distance $\Lambda =16\pi /180=0.27925$, $R=6.4\times 10^6\mathrm{m}$ and $v=800/3.6=222.2\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the nominal flight time after the equator isTaking $\Omega \simeq 2\pi /(86400\mathrm{s})$ givesThe small-latitude approximation $\sin (vt/R)\simeq vt/R$ gives ${\ddot{x}}_E\simeq 4\Omega v^{2}t/R$ and $x_E\simeq 2\Omega v^2{t}^3/(3R)$, or $1.95\times 10^5\mathrm{m}$, confirming the scale and direction.

This is an estimate under an explicit steering model, not an exact trajectory forced by the wording. For example, retaining spherical transport of the local axes while still linearizing in the cross-track motion gives, with $s=-\lambda$, $\dot{u}-(v/R)u\tan s=4\Omega v\sin s$. Consequently $u\cos s=2\Omega R{\sin }^{2}s$ and the longitude departure is $\Delta \ell =2\Omega R(\tan \Lambda -\Lambda )/v$. The distance along the destination parallel is then $R\cos \Lambda \Delta \ell \simeq 1.93\times 10^5\mathrm{m}$. Corrections from the changed track and a more detailed control law are not fixed by the problem. If “keeps the velocity constant” instead means the full vector, the pilot would need an additional compensating force and there would be no miss; if thrust is kept at a specified geographical bearing despite drift, its along-track component and lateral drag must also be modelled.

Inertia and principal directions. About the centre of mass, the inertia tensor isIt relates angular momentum and angular velocity by $\mathbf{J}=\mathsf{I}\mathbf{\omega }$ and gives rotational kinetic energy $T=\mathbf{\omega }\cdot \mathsf{I}\mathbf{\omega }/2$. The principal axes are orthogonal eigenvector directions of this real symmetric tensor; in that basis it is diagonal, with entries the principal moments of inertia $I_1,I_2,I_3$.

Derivatives in a rotating frame. Write $\mathbf{J}={\sum }_i{J}_i{\mathbf{e}}_i$ in a body-fixed orthonormal basis. Each basis vector rotates according to $(d{\mathbf{e}}_i/dt{)}_0=\mathbf{\omega }\times {\mathbf{e}}_i$. Differentiating the components and basis separately proves the rotating-frame derivative formula,The body derivative differentiates the scalar components in that basis. A fixed pivot can replace the centre of mass when the corresponding angular-momentum balance is valid.

Euler equations. The inertial angular-momentum equation is $d\mathbf{J}/dt=\mathbf{G}$. Since the principal moments are constant in the body frame, substitute $J_i=I_i{\omega }_i$:These are Euler's equations in the principal body frame.

Linear perturbation of free rotation. After the impulse, $\mathbf{G}=0$. Let ${\omega }_3=\Omega$ to leading order and ${\omega }_1,{\omega }_2$ be small. The third Euler equation changes ${\omega }_3$ only at quadratic order, so the linear transverse equations areFor ${\omega }_1=a{e}^{pt}$ and ${\omega }_2=b{e}^{pt}$, eliminate $a,b$ fromThis givesIts units are inverse square seconds. Positive $p^2$ gives a growing real exponential; negative $p^2$ gives bounded oscillatory perturbations.

Use orthonormal basis vectors ${\mathbf{e}}_i(t)$ fixed in the rotating reference frame, and expand the angular momentum as $\mathbf{J}={\sum }_i{J}_i{\mathbf{e}}_i$. Over time $dt$, the basis undergoes infinitesimal rotation $\mathbf{\Omega }dt$, soThe product rule gives the rotating-frame derivative formula:Since the applied couple is the rate of change of angular momentum in the inertial frame,The second term accounts for the changing basis, even when the components of angular momentum are constant in the rotating reference frame.

For this gyrocompass, let $\mathbf{n},\mathbf{w},\mathbf{z}$ be local north, west and upward unit vectors, forming a right-handed basis. Earth's rotation has local componentsLet the spin axis point along $\mathbf{u}=\cos \theta \mathbf{n}+\sin \theta \mathbf{w}$, and write its dominant angular momentum as $J_s\mathbf{u}$, where $J_s=I_1\omega >0$. In mechanical equilibrium relative to Earth, this leading angular momentum is fixed in the terrestrial rotating reference frame. The bearings can exert horizontal torques to keep the axle horizontal, but free rotation about the vertical implies $G_z=0$. The vertical component of the rotating-frame derivative formula therefore requiresAway from either geographical pole, $\cos \lambda \ne 0$, henceThis is a necessary equilibrium condition; the next part distinguishes its stable and unstable spin orientations. The rapid-spin approximation neglects angular momentum terms of order $I_2{\Omega }_E$ compared with $I_1\omega$. At either pole the horizontal component of Earth's rotation vanishes, and this north-seeking mechanism gives no preferred horizontal direction. The paper explicitly excludes $90^{\circ }$; if latitude is signed, $-90^{\circ }$ must likewise be excluded.

Newton's second law takes its familiar form $m\mathbf{a}=\mathbf{F}$ in an inertial frame. Axes fixed to a turning apparatus or to the Earth form a rotating reference frame. Extra inertial forces account for the acceleration of these coordinates. Their values depend on the chosen reference frame; physical interactions such as gravity, tension and contact forces must still be included separately.

Let the rotating origin have inertial acceleration $\mathbf{A}$, and let its axes have angular velocity $\mathbf{\Omega }(t)$. For any vector $\mathbf{q}$, the rotating-frame derivative formula isEach rotating basis vector changes by $\mathbf{\Omega }\times {\mathbf{e}}_i$, which proves this rule by expanding $\mathbf{q}$ in that basis. Apply it twice to the position relative to the moving origin. With ${\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }$ and ${\mathbf{a}}^{\prime }$ measured in the rotating axes,Consequently the equation in the rotating reference frame isThe additional terms are the translational inertial force, Coriolis force, Euler force and centrifugal force, respectively. The last two simplify when the angular velocity is constant: the Euler force vanishes, while the other rotation terms remain.

The centrifugal force points away from the rotation axis. If ${\mathbf{r}}_{\perp }$ is the perpendicular displacement from that axis, thenFor uniform rotation it has potential energyA mass at rest relative to a turntable can therefore be described as having an inward tension or friction balancing its outward centrifugal force. In an inertial frame, the inward physical force instead produces the required centripetal acceleration. These are two descriptions of the same motion; one must not insert the rotating-frame outward term into the inertial equation as an additional physical interaction.

A rotating liquid gives a useful quantitative example. For a liquid in hydrostatic equilibrium relative to a vessel rotating uniformly about the vertical axis,Along the free surface the pressure is constant, so ${\Omega }^{2}sds-gdz=0$ andThe surface is a elliptic paraboloid. This is the balance of gravity and the centrifugal force in the rotating description. On the Earth, the same outward acceleration reduces effective gravity, most strongly at the equator, and contributes to the planet's equatorial bulge.

The Coriolis force depends on relative motion:It is perpendicular to both $\mathbf{\Omega }$ and ${\mathbf{v}}^{\prime }$, vanishes for motion along the rotation axis, and reverses when the relative velocity reverses. The dot product givesThus the Coriolis force does no work in the rotating reference frame: it changes the direction of motion rather than directly changing the rotating-frame kinetic energy. For example, on a horizontal turntable rotating anticlockwise as viewed from above, an outward-moving slider has a clockwise Coriolis acceleration, whereas an inward-moving slider has an anticlockwise one. The deflection can be observed by comparing a laboratory camera with a camera rotating with the table.

For slow horizontal motion on the Earth at latitude $\lambda$, keep the vertical component ${\Omega }_E\sin \lambda$ of its angular velocity. In east-north coordinates $(u,v)$ the horizontal Coriolis acceleration isIt deflects motion to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere. In large-scale atmospheric and oceanic motion it can balance a horizontal pressure gradient, giving geostrophic balance. With $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ upward, the steady horizontal equation without friction isThe resulting velocity runs along lines of equal pressure. This approximation requires rotation to dominate local inertial changes; it is inappropriate close to the equator where $f$ tends to zero.

The Foucault pendulum gives another terrestrial example. In the small-angle approximation, its horizontal coordinates satisfyTo first order in the small ratio ${\Omega }_E/{\omega }_0$, the oscillation plane precesses relative to the ground at angular rate $-{\Omega }_E\sin \lambda$: clockwise in the northern hemisphere, zero at the equator, and one revolution per sidereal day at a pole. The Coriolis force explains this changing orientation without requiring energy input. Together these examples show why inertial forces are useful whenever the apparatus or environment supplies naturally rotating coordinates.