Finding Cartesian Equations for Intersecting Planes and a Line

  • Thread starter Thread starter Physics is Phun
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line Planes
AI Thread Summary
To find Cartesian equations for intersecting planes given the vector equation of their intersection line, one approach involves converting the line's equation into parametric form and using matrices. The solution requires selecting two non-parallel vectors and taking their cross products with a vector parallel to the line to determine the planes' normals. The resulting normals can then be used to formulate the equations of the planes, ensuring they include a point from the line. It is crucial to note that the selected vectors do not need to lie on the planes but must be parallel to them. This method effectively addresses the problem of finding the equations while adhering to the condition that all components of the normals are non-zero.
Physics is Phun
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
How would you go about finding cartesian equations of intersecting planes when you have the vector equation of the line they intersect at. THere in obviously an infinate number of solution. The catch is that all the x,y,z values of the planes normals must not be 0.
So I was thinking you but the lines equation into parametric for then from that you can put it into a matrix, then you can somehow "unsolve" it (at the moment in our geometry class we have learned how to solve systems using the matrix but this seems to be the reverse.) One of my friends did this problem that way and it seems to work but I was wondering if there is something else that I should be doing.

thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
anyone? I can give you the specific example, but I wanted to keep this general as not to put it in the homework section.
here it is. r= (2,-1,0) + t(4,5,1) remember, all the components of the normals are non-zero values.
 
In the abscense of further requirements... Choose any two non-parallel vectors. Take the cross product of each with a vector that is parallel to the line. The resulting two vectors can be used as plane normals. You can then find the equations of the planes if you know a point on the line.

For the example you gave, you could choose the first vector as (1, 2, 3), giving a plane normal (4,5,1) x (1,2,3) = (13, -11, 3). The equation for a plane with (13,-11,3) as a normal is 13x - 11y + 3z + d = 0, this plane must include the point (2, -1, 0), so we take d = -37.

Take the second vector to be (1, 2, 4), giving the normal (4,5,1) x (1,2,4) = (18, -15, 3). The plane's equation is 18x - 15y + 3z - 51 = 0.
 
but how do you know the vectors (1,2,3) and (1,2,4) are on the plane?
 
Let's say you've got some nonzero vector <A_1,B_1,C_1> then take some non-parralel, non-zero but otherwise arbitrary vector <A_2,B_2,C_2>.

Then let
\vec{v}_1=<A_1,B_1,C_1>\times<A_2,B_2,C_2>
and
\vec{v}_2=<A_1,B_1,C_1>\times \vec{v}_1

From the properties of the cross product those two vectors are perpendicular to each other, and perpendicular to your original vector. Then if
\vec_{v}_1=<x_1,y_1,z_1>
the equation
?=x_1x+y_1y+z_1z
represents a plane parralel to the line since it is normal to \vec{v}_1(you'll have to solve to get the appropriate "?" and use a similar technique for finding the other plane.
 
but how do you know the vectors (1,2,3) and (1,2,4) are on the plane?

I don't - they're not on the plane, they're just parallel to their respective planes.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top