Equation of a plane containing two lines

  • Thread starter Thread starter KevinL
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lines Plane
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the equation of a plane that contains two lines represented in symmetric form. The correct approach involves identifying direction vectors for each line rather than normal vectors. For the first line, the direction vector is determined to be D = <-2, 1, 1>, and the second line's direction vector is derived similarly. The cross product of these direction vectors yields a normal vector for the plane, which can then be used alongside a point from one of the lines to formulate the plane's equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of symmetric equations of lines
  • Knowledge of vector operations, specifically cross products
  • Familiarity with the equation of a plane in vector form
  • Ability to identify direction vectors from line equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of direction vectors from symmetric equations of lines
  • Learn how to compute cross products of vectors in three-dimensional space
  • Explore the formulation of plane equations using normal vectors and points
  • Practice problems involving the intersection of lines and planes
USEFUL FOR

Students studying geometry, particularly those focusing on vector calculus and three-dimensional geometry, as well as educators teaching these concepts in mathematics courses.

KevinL
Messages
37
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find an equation of the plane that contains the lines given by:

(x-1)/-2 = y - 4 = z and (x-2)/-3 = (y-1)/4 = (z-2)/-1

The Attempt at a Solution



Not too sure about how to go about it. I believe these are the parametric equations for the lines:

x = 1-2t w/ normal vector = (-2,0,0)
y=4
z=0

x=2-3t w/ normal vector = (-3, 4, -1)
y=1+4t
z=2-t

If I take the cross product of those normal vectors, I get (0, -2, -8). What do I do from here or am I going in the wrong direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you are going in the wrong direction. You don't want normal vectors for the two lines -- each line has an infinite number of normal vectors. What you want instead is a vector that has the same direction as the line.

You don't need to convert the symmetric equations for your lines into parametric equations - you can read off a point on each line and a vector parallel to the line from the equations.

For example, in the symmetric equations for L1, a point on the line is (1, 4, 0), and a vector that has the same direction as the line (is parallel to the line) is <-2, 1, 1>.

Use the same process to find the direction of the second line. When you get that vector, cross it with <-2, 1, 1>. That will give you a vector that is perpendicular to both given vectors, and hence both given lines. For the time being, let's call it <A, B, C>.

If you know a point (x0, y0, z0) on a plane and its normal, <A, B, C>, you can write the equation of the plane as A(x - x0) + B(y - y0) + C(z - z0) = 0.
 
KevinL said:

Homework Statement


Find an equation of the plane that contains the lines given by:

(x-1)/-2 = y - 4 = z and (x-2)/-3 = (y-1)/4 = (z-2)/-1

The Attempt at a Solution



Not too sure about how to go about it. I believe these are the parametric equations for the lines:

x = 1-2t w/ normal vector = (-2,0,0)
y=4
z=0

x=2-3t w/ normal vector = (-3, 4, -1)
y=1+4t
z=2-t

If I take the cross product of those normal vectors, I get (0, -2, -8). What do I do from here or am I going in the wrong direction?

You don't have "the" normal vector to a line; it has many normals. But you do have a direction vector to a line, which is what you are calculating, although the first one is wrong. If you write your first line in the symmetric form:

\frac {x-2}{-2} = \frac{y-4}{1} =\frac{z}{1}

you will see that its direction vector is D = <-2,1,1>, not <-2,0,0>.

What you get when you cross them is a vector perpendicular to both of them, so perpendicular to the intended plane. With the normal vector and a point on one line, you can calculate the equation of the plane through that point containing that line. With luck, but it doesn't have to, it may also contain the other line; you have to check that.
 
Thanks guys, worked it out and the answer agrees with the back of the book :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K