B Error in Vector Addition: U & V Perpendicular

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on an error in vector addition involving two perpendicular unit vectors, U and V, and a vector W. The user is trying to resolve the equation W × V = U - W but encounters inconsistencies in their calculations. Clarification is provided regarding notation, specifically the use of the cross product, and the correct application of vector rules. The key error identified is a sign mistake and a misplacement of components in the calculations. The resolution emphasizes the importance of correctly pairing orthogonal vectors to derive accurate equations.
Amine_prince
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
i have two unitary vectors in space U and V , U and V are perpendicular .
W is a vector that verifies W ^ V = U - W .
the following resolution is incorrect , i wan't to understand why :

we use (o,U,V,(U^V)) . components of U (1,0,0) , V(0,1,0) , W(a,b,c) where a , b and c are real numbers .
components of W ^ V ( c , 0 , a) . and U - W ( 1-a , -b, -c)
where is the error here ?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Amine_prince said:
i have two unitary vectors in space U and V , U and V are perpendicular .
W is a vector that verifies W ^ V = U - W .
the following resolution is incorrect , i wan't to understand why :

we use (o,U,V,(U^V)) . components of U (1,0,0) , V(0,1,0) , W(a,b,c) where a , b and c are real numbers .
components of W ^ V ( c , 0 , a) . and U - W ( 1-a , -b, -c)
where is the error here ?

I'm not sure about your notation: ^ means vector cross-product? I've always used \times

If so, then you are on the right track. U, V, U \times V can be used as an orthonormal basis. So we can write W as a linear combination:

W = a U + b V + c (U \times V)

Then W \times V = U - W becomes:

(a U + b V + c (U \times V)) \times V = U - a U - b V - c (U \times V)

Now, we use the rules:
X \times X = 0
(X \times Y) \times Z = (X \cdot Z) V - X (Y \cdot Z)

where \cdot is the vector scalar product.

Applying these rules gives us:
a U \times V + 0 + c (U \cdot V) V - c U (V \cdot V) = U - a U - bV - c (U \times V)

This simplifies to:
a U \times V - c U = (1-a)U - b V - c(U \times V)

So if you just pair up the corresponding orthogonal vectors, this gives three equations:
  1. a = -c
  2. 0 = -b
  3. -c = (1-a)
 
thank you sir :)
 
Amine_prince said:
thank you sir :)
Looking at what you wrote, I think that your problem is that

(a, b, c) \times (0,1,0) = (-c, 0, a)
 
yes , i missed the sign . and flipped the numbers by mistake .
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Back
Top