How can I prove this function is a linear function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tamtam402
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Linear
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the function f(r) = A • (r - kz) is a linear operator. The user initially concludes that the function is not linear based on their calculations, as they find that f(r1 + r2) does not equal f(r1) + f(r2). They clarify that r is a vector in three-dimensional space, and k is a unit vector in the z-direction. Further insights suggest that the key to proving linearity lies in correctly applying the -kz term before analyzing the vectors. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding vector operations and their implications for linearity in functions.
tamtam402
Messages
199
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm trying to prove f(r) = A \bullet (r - kz) is a linear operator, but I don't understand why it is linear.

Homework Equations


A function of a vector is called linear if:
f(r1+r2) = f(r1) + f(r2) and f(ar) = af(r)


The Attempt at a Solution



f(r1+r2) = A \bullet (r1+r2 - kz) = A\bulletr1 + A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

However, f(r1) + f(r2) = A\bulletr1 - A\bulletkz
+ A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

So, I just proved that the function is NOT a linear function, how great... :(

By the way, r = (x,y,z) in this book, if that changes anything.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it safe to assume this is an error in my book's manual? I even tried developing the vectors, here's my attempt. (Disregard the 3.7.1 part)
 

Attachments

Ok, upon further investigation, the only way this can be linear is if I have to apply the -kz part BEFORE writing down my r vectors, which means

f(r1+r2) = (a1,a2,a3) \bullet (x1+x2,y1+y2,0)

If that was the case, how in the hell was I supposed to know I had to do that (as opposed to what I did in my scanned solution)??!
 
I'm assuming by you saying r is a vector, you're saying r\inℝn. Notice that what you're trying to prove is f is closed under addition and scalar multiplication which implies f is linear.

Suppose that : r1,r2\inℝn

Then the way you would go about proving something like f(r1+r2)=f(r1) + f(r2) is to literally ADD the two vectors together since adding two objects together from the same field should result in something from the same field ( If it doesn't then you simply don't have anything to prove here ) and THEN you perform the operator f on the NEW object. Simply separating the newly formed object into its two founding objects is a simple task at this point which should result in your answer.
 
tamtam402 said:

Homework Statement



I'm trying to prove f(r) = A \bullet (r - kz) is a linear operator, but I don't understand why it is linear.

Homework Equations


A function of a vector is called linear if:
f(r1+r2) = f(r1) + f(r2) and f(ar) = af(r)


The Attempt at a Solution



f(r1+r2) = A \bullet (r1+r2 - kz) = A\bulletr1 + A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

However, f(r1) + f(r2) = A\bulletr1 - A\bulletkz
+ A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

So, I just proved that the function is NOT a linear function, how great... :(

By the way, r = (x,y,z) in this book, if that changes anything.

k is the unit vector in the z direction, and r is given by:

r = x i + y j + z k

Therefore, f (r) = A \bullet (x i + y j)

Alternately,

f(r1) = A\bullet (r1 - k z1)

f(r2) = A\bullet (r2 - k z2)

Try it now.
 
tamtam402 said:

Homework Statement



I'm trying to prove f(r) = A \bullet (r - kz) is a linear operator, but I don't understand why it is linear.

Homework Equations


A function of a vector is called linear if:
f(r1+r2) = f(r1) + f(r2) and f(ar) = af(r)


The Attempt at a Solution



f(r1+r2) = A \bullet (r1+r2 - kz) = A\bulletr1 + A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

However, f(r1) + f(r2) = A\bulletr1 - A\bulletkz
+ A\bulletr2 - A\bulletkz

So, I just proved that the function is NOT a linear function, how great... :(

By the way, r = (x,y,z) in this book, if that changes anything.

Note: z is the third component of \textbf{r}, so if you have \textbf{r}_1 and \textbf{r}_2 you need z_1 and z_2.

RGV
 
Yeah thanks everyone. I was assuming the kz wasn't the "same z" as the z component from the r vectors, which means I considered r1-z as (x1,y1,z1)-(0,0,z) = (x1,y1,z1-z).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K