Can Vectors Have Zero Magnitude with Nonzero Components?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Vectors can have a component equal to zero while still possessing a nonzero magnitude, as demonstrated by a vector with a zero Y-component and a non-zero X-component. However, a vector cannot have zero magnitude if any of its components are nonzero, as the presence of nonzero components implies a nonzero magnitude. The magnitude of a vector is determined by the Pythagorean theorem, where the length r is calculated as r = sqrt(x² + y² + z²). If r equals zero, all components (x, y, z) must also equal zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector components in physics
  • Familiarity with the Pythagorean theorem
  • Basic knowledge of vector magnitude
  • Concept of vector addition and cancellation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study vector component analysis in physics
  • Learn about vector addition and cancellation effects
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of vector magnitude
  • Investigate real-world applications of vectors in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on vector analysis, as well as educators seeking to clarify vector concepts for their students.

kraaaaamos
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Vectors and Magnitude - Theoretical -- PLEASE HELP!

Homework Statement


1. a. Can a vector have a component equal to zero and still have nonzero magnitude? Explain.
b. Can a vector have zero magnitude if one of its components is nonzero? Explain.



Homework Equations



During lecture, the prof. mentioned that magnitudes are always positive.
There is nothing in our textbook that discusses magnitues equaling zero.

Plus, I have no idea what the question is asking.
: (


The Attempt at a Solution




I went to look through other physics websites on the net. And from what I understand . . .
If a vector has nonzero components, it cannot have a magnitude of a vector because the very fact that it has a nonzero component, already implies a nonzero magnitude.

If a vector has a magnitude of nonzero, then the magnitude must come from nonzero components of a vector?

I don't know if that's right . . . and if the explanation is sufficient? = S
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Vectors can have zero magnitude. They just can't have negative magnitude.
 
I looked at the question again.

a) Yes. It can have a Y-component of zero and a non-zero x-component, which will equal to a nonzero magnitude. Therefore, a vector can have zero component, but still have a nonzero magnitude.

b) I'm not sure. Is the magnitude zero if someone travels 6m north, then 6m south?

Because in that case, it would be possible to have zero magnitude even if you have nonzero components, IF the nonzero components cancel each other out (like in the case where someone travels 6m north and then 6m south) . I don't know if that makes sense.
 
You would need two vectors to describe the path of someone walking north, then south. Once you add the two vectors, you're left with one vector, and you can determine the north-south component, the east-west component, and the up-down component (for 3D space). You can't have two north-south components for the same vector.
 
I have no idea what the answer is. Can you give me a hint for these questions:

1. a. Can a vector have a component equal to zero and still have nonzero magnitude? Explain.
b. Can a vector have zero magnitude if one of its components is nonzero? Explain.
 
You are correct on part a. For part b, you need a better understanding of what the components of a vector are. To put it simply, if you have a vector on a plane, its length along the x-axis is one component and its length along the y-axis is the other component. Now, let's say the length along the x-axis is 1.0 . Can the vector possibly have zero length?

Here's another way to think about it. If x, y, and z are the components of a vector, its length r is

r = sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)

because of the Pythagorean theorem. If r = 0, what are the possible values of x, y, and z?
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K