Finding the Intersection of Two Planes: Solving for the Equation of a Line

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tenshou
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planes
Tenshou
Messages
153
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



What is the equation of a line of the intersecting planes
##3x_1-2x_2+x_3=5##
##2x_1+3x_2-x_3=-1##

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I didn't know where to start but I started at trying to find the cross product of the planes (needless to say it didn't get me and where) I got ##-x_1-5x_2+11x_3## that equation doesn't make any sense x.x I do not know what to do x.x
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tenshou said:
What is the equation of a line of the intersecting planes
##3x_1-2x_2+x_3=5##
##2x_1+3x_2-x_3=-1##
first use elimination on the planes, thus add (1)+(2)=5x_1+x_2=4:
solving gives: x_2=4-{5x_1}
take x_1=t thus x_2=4-{5t}
now sub x_1,x_2 into (1) or (2) to find x_3 in terms of t
now you may write up the line in parametric form: (x_1(t),x_2(t),x_3(t))
 
Hi Tenshou! :smile:
Tenshou said:
… I started at trying to find the cross product of the planes (needless to say it didn't get me and where) I got ##-x_1-5x_2+11x_3## …

no, your 11 should be 13, shouldn't it? :wink:

(and i think one of your signs is wrong)

that method should work …

it gives you the direction that is perpendicular to both normals, and therefore it must lie in both planes …

now you have something like x2 = Ax1 + B, x3 = Cx1 + D, where A and C are known,

so you substitute that into the original equations, and that gives you two equations in two unknowns (B and D) …

but I'm not sure that's any quicker than joshmccraney's :smile: method!​
 
Thank you for your insightful answers but I think the easiest solution was IMS... Thank you so much, I mean I just did it this morning (and yes my maths were wrong.) Solved the equation of

##A####x##=##b##

I was looking for the simplest way to solving it and josh, I think your way is the simplest way for solving it(thanks by the way). Although, I still did not get the equation in the book I got ##A## as a 2x3 matrix

##
\left[
\begin{array} {r r r r}
\ 3 &\ -2 &\ 1 \\
\ 2 &\ 3 &\ -1 \\
\end{array}
\right]
##

Then after rref(A) [or something close to it] I got

##
\left[
\begin{array} {r r r r}
\ -7 &\ 0 &\ 1 \\
\ -5 &\ 1 &\ 0 \\
\end{array}
\right]
##

I calculated by Nullity-Rank that I should have one free column left. I solved and got
##
\left[
\begin{array} {r r r r}
\ 0 &\ 4 &\ 13 \\
\end{array}
\right] = x_{part}^T
##

then I just found out the solution to the null space thank you for correcting my maths tiny-tin

##
\left[
\begin{array} {r r r r}
\ -1 &\ 5 &\ 13 \\
\end{array}
\right] = x_{null}^T
##

then I finished up by allowing ##x_{comp}=\lambda x_{null}+x_{part}; \forall \lambda \epsilon\mathbb{R}##

Although I went though a page and a half of calculation I will remember your method josh!

the answer in the book is ##x_1 = -k+1; x_2 = 5k-1; x_3 = 13k; \forall k \epsilon \mathbb{R}##
 
Last edited:
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top