Yeah, I tried the hint. I substituted u to put it in a triple scalar form. As far as I know, you can only manipulate three distinct vectors in the triple scalar. The (b x c) is a particular vector. That's why I substituted u in.

Yeah, (a x b) x c = - c x (a x b). Dotting that identity with d explicitly gives you (i).

I tried to get (i) directly from (ii) by dotting a x (b x c) with d and manipulating the scalar product form. However, it seems that you're supposed to merely use the form of (ii) and its known identity to derive (i), not necessarily stick with the given (ii). Is that correct? Is it even possible to derive (i) the way I was going at it?

Yes. I rotated until I got back to where I started. I'm at work right now, and all my scratch work is at the house. I tried all variations of the triple scalar product.

You probably did derive (i) with your first attempt, you just didn't realize it.

The identity [itex](\textbf{d}\times\textbf{a})\cdot(\textbf{b}\times\textbf{c})=(\textbf{a}\cdot\textbf{c})(\textbf{b}\cdot\textbf{d})-(\textbf{a}\cdot\textbf{b})(\textbf{c}\cdot\textbf{d})[/itex], is exactly the same thing as the identity [itex](\textbf{a}\times\textbf{b})\cdot(\textbf{c}\times\textbf{d})=(\textbf{a}\cdot\textbf{c})(\textbf{b}\cdot\textbf{d})-(\textbf{a}\cdot\textbf{d})(\textbf{b}\cdot\textbf{c})[/itex]...you simply have to rename your vectors [itex]\textbf{a}\to\textbf{b}[/itex], [itex]\textbf{b}\to\textbf{c}[/itex], [itex]\textbf{c}\to\textbf{d}[/itex] and [itex]\textbf{d}\to\textbf{a}[/itex].

Remember, vector identities are true for arbitrary vectors, so it doesn't matter how you name them.

And I was ready to throw in the towel, quit my major and minor and get a liberal arts degree. Well, that's just great. I knew it had to be something silly I was overlooking. The thought of renaming the vectors DID occur to me, but I didn't follow through with it. I spent an embarrassing amount of time on that problem manipulating the scalar product (ii) as written trying to get (i) as written. So, all I had to do was get the form of (i) FROM (ii) and change the vectors in the (ii) derivation to match the vectors in (i).

Okay, so combining these two lines you have [itex][\textbf{a}\times(\textbf{b}\times\textbf{c})]\cdot\textbf{d}=\alpha(\textbf{b}\cdot\textbf{d})+\beta(\textbf{c}\cdot\textbf{d})[/itex]; now use the scalar triple product rule on the LHS to get something you can compare to (i).

Close, but not quite. Try this one step at a time...what do you get when you apply (i) to [itex](\textbf{d}\times\textbf{a})\cdot(\textbf{b}\times\textbf{c})[/itex]?