Talk:Tennis racket theorem: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:14, 14 May 2022

Revision as of 23:02, 12 July 2022

Line 68:

:{{ping|Octonion}} I don't have access to http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01049489 but [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08237.pdf another paper] uses the convention I₁≤I₂≤I₃ whereas the article uses I₁>I₂>I₃. I've fixed the lede by referring to the notation used in the image and am leaving the prose for someone else to amend if needed. Cheers, '''[[User:cmglee|cmɢʟee]]'''⎆[[User_Talk:cmglee|τaʟκ]] 23:42, 19 June 2021 (UTC) '''[[User:cmglee|cmɢʟee]]'''⎆[[User_Talk:cmglee|τaʟκ]] 23:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

::{{ping|Octonion}} Fixed prose as per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tennis_racket_theorem&diff=1030939977&oldid=1030291223 '''[[User:cmglee|cmɢʟee]]'''⎆[[User_Talk:cmglee|τaʟκ]] 21:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2022 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Tennis racket theorem|answered=no}}

The sign convention used for euler's equations is inconsistent with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_equations_(rigid_body_dynamics).

I believe there is a sign error

This is how it is listed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_racket_theorem

I_{1}{\dot {\omega_{1}&=(I_{3}-I_{2})\omega _{3}\omega _{2}

I_{2}{\dot {\omega }}_{2}&=(I_{1}-I_{3})\omega _{1}\omega _{3}

I_{3}{\dot {\omega }}_{3}&=(I_{2}-I_{1})\omega _{2}\omega _{1}

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_equations_(rigid_body_dynamics)

It should be

I_{1}{\dot {\omega }}_{1}&=(I_{2}-I_{3})\omega _{3}\omega _{2}

I_{2}{\dot {\omega }}_{2}&=(I_{3}-I_{1})\omega _{1}\omega _{3}

I_{3}{\dot {\omega }}_{3}&=(I_{1}-I_{2})\omega _{2}\omega _{1}

As a result there are sign errors in the rest of this page.

<!-- Write your request ABOVE this line and do not remove the tildes and curly brackets below. -->

}} [[Special:Contributions/192.139.0.195|192.139.0.195]] ([[User talk:192.139.0.195|talk]]) 23:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC)