How can I prove that vector c bisects the angle theta between vectors a and b?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Perion
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vector
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that vector c, defined as c = |b|a + |a|b, bisects the angle theta between vectors a and b. Participants utilized the cosine of angles between vectors and explored various algebraic approaches to establish equality between the angles formed. Daniel provided a simplified geometric proof, emphasizing that the vectors form a rhombus, with c as a diagonal, inherently bisecting the angle. The conclusion confirms that the proof is valid in any dimension, despite initial assumptions of 2D.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector operations, including dot products and magnitudes
  • Familiarity with trigonometric identities, particularly the half-angle formula
  • Knowledge of geometric interpretations of vectors in a plane
  • Proficiency in manipulating algebraic expressions involving vectors
NEXT STEPS
  • Study vector geometry and properties of rhombuses in relation to vector addition
  • Learn about the half-angle and double-angle trigonometric identities
  • Explore proofs involving vector bisectors and their geometric implications
  • Investigate higher-dimensional vector spaces and their properties
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physics students, and anyone studying vector calculus or geometry who seeks to understand vector relationships and angle bisectors.

Perion
Hi. I am to show that for any non-zero vectors a, b, and c, if
c = |b|a + |a|b
then vector c bisects the angle theta between vectors a and b. [0 < theta <= Pi]

I used the vectors' component forms and let a = <a1,a2> and b = <b1,b2> and then worked out the equations for the cosine of the angles between (1) a and c, and (2) c and b. I then tried to determine if (1) and (2) were equal. I used the equations

(1) cos(phi1) = (a.c)/|a||c| and
(2) cos(phi2) = (c.b)/|c||b| [a.c and c.b are dot products]

Unfortunately I came up with some rather long, complicated, component expressions which proved quite cumbersome to test for equality. I suspect that James Stewart (my textbook author) had an easier method in mind (maybe using projections) that didn't involve such algebraic gymnastics. Am I missing some obviously simple method to go about this?

Thanks,
Perion
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do this in 2-d only?

How do you find the angle between two vectors using the dot product? And what's cos(2t) in terms of cos(t)?

If you just use those carefully (no need to do componentsin 2d) it drops out, I imagine.

For example |c|^2=c.c = 4|b|^2|a|^2, so |c|= 2|a||b|
 
[tex]\vec{c}=|\vec{b}|\vec{a}+|\vec{a}|\vec{b}[/tex] (1)

Take scalar product with itself and obtain:

[tex]|\vec{c}|^{2}=2|\vec{a}|^{2}|\vec{b}|^{2}[1+\cos(\vec{a}\vec{b})]=4|\vec{a}|^{2}|\vec{b}|^{2}\cos^{2}\frac{(\vec{a}\vec{b})}{2}[/tex] (2)

Take square root & obtain:

[tex]|\vec{c}|=2|\vec{a}|\vec{b}|\cos\frac{(\vec{a}\vec{b})}{2}[/tex] (3)

Consider the scalar product:

[tex]\vec{a}\cdot\vec{c}=|\vec{a}||\vec{c}|\cos(\vec{a}\vec{c})=|\vec{b}|\vec{a}|^{2}+|\vec{b}|\vec{a}|^{2}\cos(\vec{a}\vec{b})[/tex] (4)

,where i made specific use of (1).From (4) it follows simply (check the trick with the half-angle formula,as in (2)),that:

[tex]|\vec{c}|=2|\vec{a}||\vec{b}|\frac{\cos^{2}\frac{(\vec{a}\vec{b})}{2}}{\cos(\vec{a}\vec{c})}[/tex] (5)

Set equal (4) & (5) and,after the simplifications,u get:

[tex]\cos(\vec{a}\vec{c})=\cos\frac{(\vec{a}\vec{b})}{2}[/tex] (6)

Use the fact that the angles are in the interval [itex](0,\pi)[/itex] and we can make use of the "arccos"...You get simply:

[tex](\vec{a}\vec{c})=\frac{(\vec{a}\vec{b})}{2}[/tex] (7)

,which is just what u were supposed to prove...

Daniel.

P.S.The proof is very general.It makes no reference to any #of dimensions or a base in the vector space...
 
Last edited:
There is a simple approach involving only elementary geometry. |a|b and |b|a are the same length. These form adjacent sides of a rhombus. c is a diagonal starting at the point of origin of these vectors. Therefore it must bisect the angle formed by these sides.
 
Oh wow! Yeah - thanks for the insights. I tried manipulating my expressions in order to use the half angle trig identity but made a dumb mistake so went the idiotic component route. Actually, I shouldn't have assumed just 2D since the problem didn't specify any particular number of dimensions. I just didn't want to deal with more than 2D since the 2D component form resulted in expressions that sucked more enough for my taste.

Matt and dextercioby - your approach is the way that I wanted to go (and suspected the author desired) and now it's also why I'm kicking myself in the butt for abandoning :cry:

Thank you very much!

Perion
 
The problem is intrinsically 2-D. The two vectors define a plane, which also contains their sum vector.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K