Equation of a plane containing two lines

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the equation of a plane that contains two given lines represented in symmetric form. The subject area includes vector geometry and the properties of lines and planes in three-dimensional space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the interpretation of the lines' equations and the correct identification of direction vectors versus normal vectors. There is an exploration of how to derive a normal vector for the plane by using the cross product of the direction vectors of the lines.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on identifying direction vectors from the symmetric equations, while others have questioned the original poster's approach to using normal vectors. The conversation reflects an ongoing exploration of the correct method to find the plane's equation.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the distinction between normal vectors and direction vectors, as well as the implications of using the cross product in this context. The original poster's attempts to convert the equations into parametric form are also discussed.

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:

[tex]\frac {x-2}{-2} = \frac{y-4}{1} =\frac{z}{1}[/tex]

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
2K
  • · 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