Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Derivation of Cross Product

  1. Sep 26, 2005 #1
    Does anyone know where I can find the derivation of the cross product. I know how to use it and the like but I do not understand why the norm of the matrix :
    [tex]
    \left[ \begin{array}{ccc}i & j & k \\n1 & n2 & n3 \\m1 & m2 & m3 \\\end{array}\right] [/tex]

    yields the vector perpendicular to 'n' and 'm'.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 26, 2005 #2

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I wouldn't prove that the cross product can be written as a determinant, I would simply define it that way. Then I would prove that the result is perpendicular to both of the vectors in the cross product. How would I do that? For vectors [itex]\vec{A}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{B}[/itex] I would form the dot products [itex]\vec{A}\cdot(\vec{A}\times\vec{B})[/itex] and [itex]\vec{B}\cdot(\vec{A}\times\vec{B})[/itex] and show that they both vanish identically.
     
  4. Sep 26, 2005 #3
    Also, if you want to show that your definition above is equal to ABsinθ, you can find the determinant, square it, and then rearrange and use the definition of a dot product (you will see something similar after squaring).
     
  5. Sep 26, 2005 #4
    Yes I can see that, but what confuses me is why do those two expressions describe/yield the vector perpendicular to n and m.
     
  6. Sep 26, 2005 #5

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Because the dot product of any vector and its cross product with any other vector vanishes. The "why" is in the proof.
     
  7. Sep 26, 2005 #6
    Just out of curiosity: was this stumbled upon just like you said? (defining the cross product as a determinant) and then later shown that the resulting vector orthogonal to both? Or was that the goal and then later shown that the determinant did the trick?
     
  8. Sep 26, 2005 #7

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't know, but it sure seems easier than doing it the other way around!
     
  9. Sep 27, 2005 #8

    es

    User Avatar

  10. Sep 28, 2005 #9

    TD

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    If
    [tex]\vec c = \vec a \times \vec b = \left| {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
    {\vec 1_x } & {\vec 1_y } & {\vec 1_z } \\
    {a_1 } & {a_2 } & {a_3 } \\
    {b_1 } & {b_2 } & {b_3 } \\
    \end{array}} \right|[/tex]
    then
    [tex]\left\langle {\vec a,\vec c} \right\rangle = \left| {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
    {a_1 } & {a_2 } & {a_3 } \\
    {a_1 } & {a_2 } & {a_3 } \\
    {b_1 } & {b_2 } & {b_3 } \\
    \end{array}} \right| = 0 \Rightarrow \vec a \bot \vec c[/tex]

    In the same way, [itex]\vec b \bot \vec c[/itex] follows.
     
  11. Oct 17, 2005 #10
    derivation of Vector Cross Product

    Using determinants to describe cross products I think was discovered by a mathamatician named William Rowan Hamiliton. He came up with the algebraic forms in dot and cross products, but I have no idea how he did it. Does anybody know. I just memorize the cross product formula but don't know where it comes from. Thanks
     
  12. Oct 17, 2005 #11
    Have you taken linear algebra? You learn a lot about how determinants equal the volume of the parallelopiped made by the three vectors (or other dimensions).
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Derivation of Cross Product
  1. Cross product (Replies: 3)

  2. The Cross Product (Replies: 4)

Loading...