Generalizing Cross Products: Finding Orthogonal Vectors in n-Dimensional Space?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the generalization of the cross product to n-dimensional space, specifically focusing on finding orthogonal vectors to n-1 given vectors. Participants explore the mathematical foundations and implications of such generalizations, including references to linear algebra and tensor theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the cross product can be generalized to n dimensions to find a vector orthogonal to n-1 given vectors, citing confusion over related concepts like Hodge duality and exterior products.
  • Another participant proposes a method using an nxn matrix where the first n-1 columns are filled with n-1 vectors, suggesting that the determinant of a modified matrix can yield a vector orthogonal to those vectors.
  • A third participant discusses the scalar product as a nondegenerate bilinear form, arguing that a linear map can be defined to find the cross product of n-1 vectors, emphasizing the properties of determinants and linear dependence.
  • Reference is made to Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds" for further reading on generalized cross products.
  • A participant summarizes their understanding of the generalized cross product, noting that it has arity n-1 and outputs a 1-vector, while also questioning the unique properties of the cross product in 7 dimensions compared to other dimensions.
  • Another participant responds by explaining that the properties maintained in the 7-dimensional case are derived from the Cayley-Dickson construction, which limits non-trivial cross products to only 3 and 7 dimensions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the generalization of the cross product, with some proposing methods and others questioning the implications of dimensionality. There is no consensus on the best approach or understanding of the properties of cross products in different dimensions.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference complex mathematical concepts such as determinants, bilinear forms, and the Cayley-Dickson construction, which may require further clarification or background knowledge for complete understanding. The discussion includes unresolved questions about the nature of cross products in dimensions beyond three.

rvadd
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I'm taking multivariate calculus and my teacher just introduced the concept of cross products a week ago. Reading the Wikipedia page, I see that cross products only work in three and seven dimensions, which is puzzling.

One use of the cross product for our class is to find the vector orthogonal to the 2 given vectors. My question is can this be generalized to n dimensions to find the vector orthogonal to the n-1 given vectors? Also what is the formal method/operation of doing this?

For example, given u = \left(1,0,0,0\right), v = \left(0,1,0,0\right), w = \left(0,0,1,0\right), the vector orthogonal to u, v, and w is given by:

<br /> \left|\begin{array}{cccc}<br /> e_{1} &amp; e_{2} &amp; e_{3} &amp; e_{4} \\<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \end{array}\right|<br /> = e_{4}<br />

I read a bit about Hodge duality, exterior products, and k-vectors. Much of it was confusing, so could you clarify if you use them as I have little background in linear algebra or tensor theory.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider a nxn-matrix where the first n-1 columns (or rows) are filled with n-1 vectors. Now, for each entry in the remaining column (or row), use the determinant of the (n-1)x(n-1)-matrix you get by removing the last column (or row) and the row (or column) your entry is in.

This might look complicated, but it is easy to show for the conventional cross-product:

$$\begin{pmatrix} a_1 & b_1 &|& \color{red}{a_2b_3-b_2a_3}\\ \color{red}{a_2} & \color{red}{b_2} &|& a_3b_1-b_3a_1 \\ \color{red}{a_3} & \color{red}{b_3} &|& a_1b_2-b_1a_2 \end{pmatrix} $$

It gives a vector which is orthogonal to all other n-1 vectors.
 
Here is an argument based on the fact that the scalar product is a nondegenerate bilinear form, meaning the map Rn-->(Rn)*: x--><x, - > is surjective. (Indeed, if f:Rn-->R is any linear map, then as a matrix, it is a 1xn matrix, i.e. a vector; call it x. Then f = <x, - >. Here, (Rn)* is the set of all linear maps Rn-->R.)

Consider now the linear map f:Rn-->R defined as "w --> determinant of the matrix whose first n-1 columns are the n-1 vectors v1,...,vn-1 you want the cross-product of, and whose nth column is just w". This is linear by properties of the determinant. So, there exists a vector x such that f = <x, - >. This x is the cross-product of v1,...,vn-1 in the sense that <x,vk> = 0 for all k (by the property of the determinant that says that if the columns of A are linearly dependent, then det(A)=0).
 
the generalized cross product is discussed, as here, on pages 83-4 of spivak's calculus on manifolds.
 
Thank you for the responses. The Spivak reading was especially helpful. So, correct me if my interpretation is incorrect:

The generalized cross product in n dimensions has arity n-1, but its operands are all 1-vectors and thus the output will also be a 1-vector.

I guess this might be a different question altogether, but what makes 7 dimensions amenable to a nontrivial cross product with only 2 operands instead of 6?
 
^It is a matter of which properties to maintain. As the Wikipedia page states "The seven-dimensional cross product is (...) the only other non-trivial bilinear product of two vectors that is vector valued, anticommutative and orthogonal. This follows from the Cayley-Dickson construction, which yields algebras of order 2^n which in turn yield cross products in 2^n-1 space. The 0 and 1 dimensional cases are trivial and the 15,31,2^n-1,... cases do not have the desired properties, this leaves only the 3 and 7 dimensional cases.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K