Cross product vs dot product headache

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical relationship between the cross product and dot product of vectors, specifically focusing on expressing (A x B) dot (C x D) in terms of dot products only. The context includes concepts from vector calculus and multivariable calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the potential need to prove Lagrange's Identity and explore different methods of decomposing vectors into components. There are questions about the nature of vectors and their representation in three-dimensional space, as well as the implications of assuming the origin as a reference point.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering various perspectives on vector representation and the mathematical identities involved. Some participants provide insights into the definitions and properties of vectors, while others express confusion about the implications of different vector forms.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of homework constraints and the need for clarity on vector definitions, particularly regarding the use of the origin and the representation of vectors in different formats. Participants are also questioning the assumptions underlying their approaches to the problem.

Billybob
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show (A x B) dot (C x D) in terms of dot products only.


Homework Equations


A x B = ABsin(theta)
A dot B = AB cos (theta)


The Attempt at a Solution


Subbing both those formulas into the top I got
[ABsin(AtoB) times CDsin(CtoD) ] cos(between the two resultant vectors)

Yet then when I try to prove it, plugging in random numbers for the four beginning vectors, it doesn't come out right... any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think that is what the question is wanting you to do. I'm pretty sure they want you to prove Lagrange's Identity;

(\vec{A} \times \vec{B}) \cdot (\vec{C} \times \vec{D})= (\vec{A} \cdot \vec{C})(\vec{B} \cdot \vec{D})-(\vec{B} \cdot \vec{C})(\vec{A} \cdot \vec{D})

by decomposing each vector into its components (eg. \vec{A}=(A_x,A_y,A_z)) and carrying out the cross products and dot product and then rearranging terms to show that it equals the above expression.
 
Question from a multivariable calc newbie.
I don't see how (A subx, Asuby, Asubz) is a vector. That is a point 3D space.
This is a vector,
(A1subx, A1suby, A1subz, A2subx, A2suby, A2subz) plus all the infinite vectors that are parallel with it. Yet I always see vectors with three variables not six. Is that because you can assume it is coming from the origin?
So in that case, you would never need more than one point to define a vector in 3D space?
 
Hi Billybob! :smile:
Billybob said:
Show (A x B) dot (C x D) in terms of dot products only.

Homework Equations


A x B = ABsin(theta)
A dot B = AB cos (theta)

You left out the triple product identity … (A x B). E = (E x A).B :wink:
rockyshephear said:
Is that because you can assume it is coming from the origin?
So in that case, you would never need more than one point to define a vector in 3D space?

Hi rockyshephear! :smile:

Yes!

Technically, parallel vectors are the same

a vector only has direction and magnitude.

(I know we say force is a vector, and obviously force also has a line of application, which does matter when we calculate torques, though not when we calculate linear components … but calling force a vector is technically a bit of an understatement :wink:)
 
Thanks Tiny-Tim. You get an extra drumstick for seeing that I'm really getting it...a bit anyway. :)
Question 1
What I'm working at, my long term goal, is a deeper appreciation of Maxwell's Equations. They're good to the last drop. ha!
So an electric field is a bunch of vectors that nobody really knows where they're at in 3D space?
Question 2
Is it difficult to do cross product and dot product calculations if you are NOT assuming that the origin is the start of your vectors and you actually have two defined points for each vector?

R
 
Oh and Question 3
Since you only need one point and the origin to define a vector, are there a million ways to write a vector? I've seen a few
(x1, x2, x3)
(3i hat, 4j hat 1k hat)
(x, y, z)

(3i hat, 4j hat 1k hat) I like this one best because it give exact position of the point. The others do not.
I would think that there would always be a ref to each coord plane for a vector to be defined. What does (x1, x2, x3) mean?

Thx
 
Hi Rocky! :smile:
rockyshephear said:
So an electric field is a bunch of vectors that nobody really knows where they're at in 3D space?

No an electric field is a vector field … a different ordinary vector (ie just a direction and a magnitude) at each point. :wink:
Is it difficult to do cross product and dot product calculations if you are NOT assuming that the origin is the start of your vectors and you actually have two defined points for each vector?

Cross product and dot product only work for "ordinary" vectors :smile:
rockyshephear said:
Since you only need one point and the origin to define a vector, are there a million ways to write a vector? I've seen a few
(x1, x2, x3)
(3i hat, 4j hat 1k hat)
(x, y, z)

(3i hat, 4j hat 1k hat) I like this one best because it give exact position of the point. The others do not.

(x1, x2, x3) and (x, y, z) both presume that a basis (of three unit vectors) has already been specified (and then the x1 or y etc is just any number).

(3i hat, 4j hat 1k hat) is wrong, I'm afraid …

it makes no sense … you have to write 3i hat + 4j hat + k hat.
 
One last thing then I'll leave you alone for a while.
You said "ordinary vectors". What is the difference between an ordinary one (ordinate? or trite?) and a non-ordinary one?
 
rockyshephear said:
One last thing then I'll leave you alone for a while.
You said "ordinary vectors". What is the difference between an ordinary one (ordinate? or trite?) and a non-ordinary one?

ah, i was calling the official vector, with just magnitude and direction, an "ordinary" vector …

a vector with a line of application added is often also called a vector, but it should really have a longer name … I think of it as a vector-with-bells-on :biggrin:
 
  • #10
Well, I lied. lol
So a vector field IS, as I have said, a field of vectors, each of which is a vector, as a single vector is a vector. No distinction except there are many of them and all together they give a pictogram of the motion of particles, etc.
Thanks for all your time answer my questions.
R
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K