Why does (a.b).c make no sense?

  • Thread starter uzman1243
  • Start date
In summary: I'm not sure how it's relevant to the discussion at hand, but no, there is no need to prove a definition. It's simply a way of defining something, and it's up to us to use it consistently. So, in summary, the dot product is defined only for two vectors, and multiplying a vector by a scalar is called scalar multiplication. This is simply a convention and does not need to be proven.
  • #1
uzman1243
80
1
I was studying the dot product, and it says that (a.b).c makes no sense.

so if you do (a.b) can = to β
and then is it not possible to do β.c?

WHY can't you 'dot' a scalar and a vector? why?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
uzman1243 said:
I was studying the dot product, and it says that (a.b).c makes no sense.

so if you do (a.b) can = to β
and then is it not possible to do β.c?

WHY can't you 'dot' a scalar and a vector? why?

Because the dot product is defined ONLY for two vectors. You can multiply a vector by a scalar, and this is called scalar multiplication.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
Mark44 said:
Because the dot product is defined ONLY for two vectors. You can multiply a vector by a scalar, and this is called scalar multiplication.

But why? is there any proofs as to why this is defined this way?
 
  • #4
uzman1243 said:
But why? is there any proofs as to why this is defined this way?

Have you tried it? Write down the definition of a dot product. Make up and write down three vectors and perform the calculation.

(Note that definitions are made up, not proved. Can you prove that a cat is not a soda can? No. Its just not defined that way. Theorems and identities are what get proved, under the right definitions.)
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #5
The dot product, in two dimensions (for simplicity) is defined as:

$$\vec{a}\cdot \vec{b}=a_xb_x+a_yb_y$$

Now, this assumes ##\vec{a}=(a_x,a_y)## and ##\vec{b}=(b_x,b_y)## are vectors. What would it mean to turn ##a## into a number? Certainly you can "define" the "dot product" of a scalar and a vector as:

$$a\cdot\vec{b}=a\vec{b}=(ab_x,ab_y)$$

But that's just the same as a scalar product, so it would be supremely confusing to also call it a "dot product". That's why we don't call that the "dot product".
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #6
Matterwave said:
The dot product, in two dimensions (for simplicity) is defined as:

$$\vec{a}\cdot \vec{b}=a_xb_x+a_yb_y$$

Now, this assumes ##\vec{a}=(a_x,a_y)## and ##\vec{b}=(b_x,b_y)## are vectors. What would it mean to turn ##a## into a number? Certainly you can "define" the "dot product" of a scalar and a vector as:

$$a\cdot\vec{b}=a\vec{b}=(ab_x,ab_y)$$

But that's just the same as a scalar product, so it would be supremely confusing to also call it a "dot product". That's why we don't call that the "dot product".

thank you!
 
  • #7
No problem. =]
 
  • #8
uzman1243 said:
But why? is there any proofs as to why this is defined this way?
A definition doesn't have to be proved.
 
  • #9
ModusPwnd said:
Can you prove that a cat is not a soda can?

What an unexpected place to find such a gem.
 

1. Why does (a.b).c make no sense?

This statement is not mathematically valid. In order to perform the operation of dot product, the two vectors must have the same number of components. In this case, (a.b) is a scalar and cannot be multiplied by c, which is a vector. Therefore, the statement does not make sense.

2. Can (a.b).c be rewritten in a different way?

Yes, (a.b).c can be rewritten as a(b.c) or c(a.b). This is known as the associative property of dot product.

3. What is the significance of the dot product?

The dot product is a mathematical operation used to calculate the projection of one vector onto another. It is also used in physics to calculate work and in geometry to determine the angle between two vectors.

4. Are there any exceptions to the rule that (a.b).c makes no sense?

In some cases, (a.b).c may make sense if c is a scalar. This is because in scalar multiplication, the scalar value is multiplied by each component of the vector. Therefore, the statement (a.b).c can be interpreted as a scalar multiplied by a vector, which is valid.

5. Can (a.b).c ever equal 0?

Yes, (a.b).c can equal 0 if one of the vectors is a zero vector or if the angle between the two vectors is 90 degrees. This is because the dot product of two perpendicular vectors is always 0.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
957
  • General Math
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Calculus
Replies
4
Views
487
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
33
Views
1K
Back
Top