Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We are stuck with this question here because I cannot understand the following results. I find it hard to visualize this, let alone deduce from that. How to do it?

Objective to Attack The closely Related Problems with Orthogonal Basis and Dot Products In Polar-coordinates

  1. $\left(\hat{e}_{r}\partial_{r}\right) \cdot \left(\frac{1}{r}\hat{e}_{\theta}\partial_{\theta}\right)= 0$

  2. $\left(\frac{1}{r}\hat{e}_{\theta}\partial_{\theta}\right) \cdot \left(\hat{e}_{r}\partial_{r}\right) = \frac{1}{r} \partial_r$

  3. $\partial_\theta \hat e_r = \hat e_\theta$

  4. $\partial_\theta \hat e_\theta = -\hat e_r$


  1. I have some errors there, related to 3-4 apparently.

$$ \left(\hat{e}_{r}\partial_{r}\right) \cdot \left(\frac{1}{r}\hat{e}_{\theta}\partial_{\theta}\right) = \left(\hat{e}_{r}\partial_{r}\right) \cdot \frac{1}{r}+ \left(\hat{e}_{r}\partial_{r}\right) \cdot \left( \hat{e}_{\theta}\partial_{\theta} \right) \not = \frac{-\hat{e}_r}{r^2}+ \left(\hat{e}_{r}\cdot\hat{e}_\theta \right) \partial_{r} \partial_{\theta} $$

Perhaps Related

  1. Explain Dot product with Partial derivatives in Polar-coordinates

  2. Show geometrically $\hat{e}_R=\frac{(x,y,z)}{r}$

  3. Visual Ways to Remember Cross-product in $\mathbb F^3$?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Some hints: (not a complete solution)

  • I guess once you think about it you find it clear that $$\hat{e}_{r}\cdot\hat{e}_\theta=0$$ or in words the unit vector along the radial direction is orthogonal to the unit vector along the angular direction.

  • I guess the confusion you have originates from the following fact: the unit vectors $\hat{e}_r$ and $\hat{e}_\theta$ themselves depend on the coordinate $(r,\theta)$. This dependence is usually not made explicit but you should always keep that in mind. If you think about it then I guess it is clear. For $\theta=0$ the radial unit vector points along the $x$-axis whereas for $\theta=\pi/2$ the unit vector points along the $y$-axis.

  • The last two points hold for an arbitrary rectangular coordinate system. What is special for the polar coordinate system is that even though $\hat{e}_{r,\theta}$ depend on $\theta$ they do not depend on $r$, i.e., $$\hat{e}_{r,\theta} = \hat{e}_{r,\theta} (\theta).$$

  • The important relations $\partial_\theta \hat e_r(\theta) = \hat e_\theta (\theta)$ and $\partial_\theta \hat e_\theta(\theta) = -\hat e_r(\theta)$, you can check by taking the explicit expressions $$\begin{array}\ \hat{e}_r(\theta)&= \begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta \\ \sin \theta \end{pmatrix} & \hat{e}_\theta(\theta)&= \begin{pmatrix} -\sin \theta \\ \cos \theta \end{pmatrix} \end{array}$$

With these remarks, it is easy to show that (here, I make the dependence of the unit vectors on the coordinates explicit) $$\left(\hat{e}_{r}(\theta)\partial_{r}\right) \cdot \left(\frac{1}{r}\hat{e}_{\theta}(\theta) \partial_{\theta}\right) = \underbrace{\hat{e}_{r}(\theta) \cdot \hat{e}_{\theta}(\theta)}_{=0} \,\left(\partial_{r} \frac{1}{r} \partial_{\theta} \right) =0 .$$ The other results follow similarly (but I will leave the proof up to you).

share|cite|improve this answer
Why is there no $r$ in the $e_r(\theta)$? – hhh Mar 25 '12 at 11:38
@hhh: There is a typo. The equation you wrote is correct. Also notice that $$\hat e_r = \frac{{\bf r}}{r} = \hat e_x \frac{x}{r} + \hat e_y \frac{y}{r},$$ but $x/r = \cos\theta$ and $y/r = \sin\theta$, so there is no $r$. – user26872 Mar 25 '12 at 15:54

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.