Help with simple dot product proof

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof of the statement that if the dot product of two vectors A with B equals the dot product of A with C, then B must equal C. Participants explore this concept through various mathematical approaches and counter-examples, focusing on the properties of the dot product and vector relationships.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a proof that if A.B = A.C, then B = C, but questions the validity of their approach and the necessity of using properties of the dot product.
  • Another participant suggests using the concept of the inverse of A, but this is challenged by others who argue that the inverse does not apply in the context of dot products.
  • A participant raises the case of A being the zero vector, arguing that A.B = A.C holds true regardless of B and C, thus countering the initial claim.
  • Further, it is pointed out that even if A is not the zero vector, there are scenarios where A.(B-C) = 0 without implying B = C.
  • One participant provides a specific example with vectors in three-dimensional space to illustrate that A.B = 0 and A.C = 0 does not necessitate B = C.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on whether components of vectors B and C must share the same value, specifically questioning the use of the same variable for different components.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus. There are multiple competing views regarding the validity of the original claim, with several counter-examples provided that challenge the assertion that B must equal C.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the application of vector properties, particularly in relation to the cancellation of vectors and the implications of the dot product when involving the zero vector or perpendicular vectors.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and enthusiasts of mathematics and physics who are exploring vector operations, specifically the properties and implications of the dot product in various contexts.

Juntao
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Here's what I got to prove where '.' is dot.

A.B=A.C Then B=C True or false? If true, prove it in general terms, if false, provide a counter-example.

Ok, I just need some body to comment on my little proof here, and any guidelines to make it more thorough or whatnot.
I know that the dot product is commutative,
A.(B+C)=A.B +A.C, but not sure if it really needs to be in my proof or not.

Proof
------
Say A.B=N and A.C=N (where N is a scalar number)
so if N=N
Then A.B=A.C
If I cancel the A's, I get B=C.

Is that a good way to approach that, or is there a better way of expressing it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You know that (A^-1)(A)=1 or the identity. Then
(A^-1)(A)(B)=(A^-1)(A)C)
with this we can multiply both sides and get
1(B)=1(C) or B=C

The raeson that (A^-1)(A)=1 is because (A^-1) is the inverse for A.
 
What if A is the zero vector? Then A.B=A.C no matter what B and C are.

And even if A <> 0 if you break A, B and C down into components, I think you will find that you can come up with other situations where A.(B-C) must equal 0 even though you know nothing about the values of B and C individually.

Try it.
 
No.

In the first place, there is no "A-1" when you are talking about dot product. There is, start with, no "identity" since
A.I= A would not make sense. A is a vector and the dot product of two vectors is a number, not a vector.

You are not really using either commutative or distributive laws:
you are using cancellation which is exactly what you are asked about: Is is true that when A.B= A.C, B MUST equal C. You cannot use what you are asked to prove.

Here is a hint. Choose two vectors at right angles. Call them A and B. Now choose a third vector at right angles to A. Call it C.
What are A.B and A.C. Does that answer your question?
 
a.b=a.c
a.(b-c)=0
Therefore a is perpendicular to b-c. This does not imply b=c.

Example (3 space):
a=(1,0,0)
b=(x,u,v)
c=(x,s,t)
where x,u,v,s,t may assume any values.
 
Last edited:
I thought this problem was going to be easy, but I keep on getting confused each time I come back here. Let's see if I get this straight mathman.

Let's say that A and B are perpendicular to each other. Now another vector, C, is perpendicular to A and B.

So A.B=0 and A.C=0, but this doesn't imply that B and C HAVE to equal each other?

And one more thing.
Example (3 space):
a=(1,0,0)
b=(x,u,v)
c=(x,s,t)

Just some clarification. Does x for vecter b and c have to be the same number?
 
Take A= (1,0,0), B= (0,1,0), and C= (0,0,1). It can't get any simpler than that.


You also say:
"And one more thing.
Example (3 space):
a=(1,0,0)
b=(x,u,v)
c=(x,s,t)

Just some clarification. Does x for vecter b and c have to be the same number?"

I have absolutely no idea. Generally speaking we do NOT use the same letter to represent two different numbers, but what was the context?
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K