Vector Algebra - Vector Triple Product Proof

In summary: But what is the dot product of two vectors? I thought it was just the multiplication of the two vectors to give a scalar. I am sorry, I am really not understanding this. The dot product of two vectors is the multiplication of their components. It does give a scalar as the result, but it is not the same as the regular multiplication of two numbers. In your case, you are trying to find the dot product of two vectors, b and c, and then multiply that scalar by the vector a. Does that make sense?
  • #1
H2instinct
20
0

Homework Statement



Prove, by writing out in component form, that
[tex]\left(a \times b \right) \times c \equiv \left(a \bullet c\right) b - \left(b \bullet c\right) a[/tex]and deduce the result, [tex]\left(a \times b\right) \times c \neq a \times \left(b \times c\right)[/tex], that the operation of forming the vector product is non-associative.

The Attempt at a Solution


So I took the LHS and made it into component form:

[tex]LHS = \left(\left(\left(a_{z} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{z}\right) - \left(a_{x} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right)\right) - \left(\left(a_{x} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{y}\right) + \left(a_{y} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{y}\right)\right)\right) \hat{i} + \left(\left(\left(a_{x} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{x}\right) - \left(a_{y} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{x}\right)\right) - \left(\left(a_{y} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) + \left(a_{z} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{z}\right)\right)\right) \hat{j}[/tex]
[tex]+ \left(\left(\left(a_{y} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{y}\right) - \left(a_{z} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{y}\right)\right) - \left(\left(a_{z} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{x}\right) + \left(a_{x} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{x}\right)\right)\right) \hat{k} [/tex]

[tex]RHS = \left(a_{x} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{x}\right) \hat{i} +\left(a_{y} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{y}\right) \hat{j} + \left(a_{z} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) \hat{k} - \left(a_{x} \cdot b_{x} \cdot c_{x}\right) \hat{i} + \left(a_{y} \cdot b_{y} \cdot c_{y}\right) \hat{j} + \left(a_{z} \cdot b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) \hat{k}[/tex]

This doesn't seem very difficult to me, however, the algebra of it is all over the place. I believe I found the component form of each side properly, but I could have screwed up somewhere. I am definitely not getting the RHS = LHS, so I am either screwing up somewhere or am totally on the wrong path. Any help, either noticing what I have done wrong, or a fresh start is much appreciated. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Recheck your RHS, all important terms are missing. Notice that a, b, and c have 3 components each, be careful in the multiplication. Also, you have problems on the signs in your LHS.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
one thing i find useful for thrse problems is working in subcript notation, where repeated indicies mean a sum is performed over that index. The dot products & cross products then become:

[tex] a \bullet b = a_i b_j \delta_{ij} = a_i b_i [/tex]
[tex] (a \times b)_k = a_i b_j \epsilon_{ijk} [/tex]

where [itex] \delta_{ij} [/itex] is the kronecker delat & [itex] \epsilon_{ijk} [/itex] is the levi cevita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronecker_delta
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol

takes a little time to learn this notation to start, but i find they're an extra tool in the toolbox & can save a lot of time
 
  • #4
rickz02 said:
Recheck your RHS, all important terms are missing. Notice that a, b, and c have 3 components each, be careful in the multiplication. Also, you have problems on the signs in your LHS.

I am not fully understanding the dot product multiplication rule because how I think it is supposed to be multiplied to show component form just keeps coming out as I have it shown above.

Also, I fixed the signs of the LHS, I believe that is now correct.

This is where I get stuck:

[tex]RHS = \left(a_{x} \cdot c_{x} + a_{y} \cdot c_{y} + a_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) b - \left(b_{x} \cdot c_{x} + b_{y} \cdot c_{y} + b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) a[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #5
In dot product multiplication you just have to multiply the components of the vectors with the same unit vectors (i.e. i to i, j to j, k to k).

I can see in your solution above that you don't have a problem with the dot product multiplication. You just confused it (indicated by a dot) with the ordinary multiplication (indicated by the the parentheses).
 
  • #6
rickz02 said:
In dot product multiplication you just have to multiply the components of the vectors with the same unit vectors (i.e. i to i, j to j, k to k).

I can see in your solution above that you don't have a problem with the dot product multiplication. You just confused it (indicated by a dot) with the ordinary multiplication (indicated by the the parentheses).

You are correct... I confused regular multiplication with dot product. But what exactly is the parentheses multiplication of vectors? I though that was the dot product. Still confused...
 
  • #7
Another thing, you have sign problems in your RHS as well, all the terms you have there should cancel out.
 
  • #8
rickz02 said:
Another thing, you have sign problems in your RHS as well, all the terms you have there should cancel out.

Ya. Just don't understand from here...

[tex]
RHS = \left(a_{x} \cdot c_{x} + a_{y} \cdot c_{y} + a_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) b - \left(b_{x} \cdot c_{x} + b_{y} \cdot c_{y} + b_{z} \cdot c_{z}\right) a
[/tex]

to the solution.
 
  • #9
Just do the normal multiplication like (a+x)(b+y) = ab + bx + ay + xy.
 
  • #10
Remember that b has three components; bx, by and bz. The same goes with a.
 
  • #11
rickz02 said:
Remember that b has three components; bx, by and bz. The same goes with a.

If you are saying to multiply them like this...


[tex]

RHS = \left((a_{x} \cdot c_{x} \cdot b) + (a_{y} \cdot c_{y} \cdot b) + (a_{z} \cdot c_{z} \cdot b) \right) - \left((b_{x} \cdot c_{x} \cdot a) + (b_{y} \cdot c_{y} \cdot a) + (b_{z} \cdot c_{z} \cdot a)\right)

[/tex]

That really only makes me consider the same questions I was considering before -.-
 
  • #12
Exactly, now your b = bx i + by j + bz k and your a = ax i + ay j + az k. Substitute and simplify again. Remove the dots so you won't be confused it with the dot product.
 
  • #13
Actually an easy way to do this is suggested by lanedance, but it needs some more understanding of the tensor notations. Using the notations you're actually left working with indices.
 
  • #14
Luckily the easy way to do this also involves more learning. It's still not making sense btw.
 
  • #15
H2instinct said:
[tex]

RHS = \left((a_{x} \cdot c_{x} \cdot b) + (a_{y} \cdot c_{y} \cdot b) + (a_{z} \cdot c_{z} \cdot b) \right) - \left((b_{x} \cdot c_{x} \cdot a) + (b_{y} \cdot c_{y} \cdot a) + (b_{z} \cdot c_{z} \cdot a)\right)

[/tex]

This one is almost close to the proof. Just continue this.
 

1. What is vector algebra?

Vector algebra is a branch of mathematics that involves the manipulation and study of vectors, which are quantities that have both magnitude and direction.

2. What is the vector triple product?

The vector triple product is a mathematical operation that involves three vectors and results in a new vector. It is defined as the cross product of the cross product of two vectors and a third vector.

3. How do you prove the vector triple product?

The proof for the vector triple product involves using the properties of vector algebra, such as the distributive property and the properties of the cross product, to manipulate the given vectors and show that the result is equal to the triple vector product.

4. What are the applications of vector triple product?

The vector triple product has various applications in physics, engineering, and computer graphics. It is used to calculate forces, moments, and torques in mechanics and is also used to determine the orientation of objects in 3D space.

5. Are there any alternative methods to prove the vector triple product?

Yes, there are alternative methods to prove the vector triple product, such as using geometric proofs or using the properties of the scalar triple product. However, the vector algebra method is the most commonly used and most efficient method for proving the vector triple product.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
752
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
507
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
486
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
779
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
876
Replies
2
Views
121
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
411
Back
Top