How can the vector triple product be used to derive other vector products?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the vector triple product and its applications in deriving other vector products, specifically focusing on an identity involving the dot and cross products of vectors. Participants reference the book "Introduction to Electrodynamics" by Griffiths to explore these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to derive the identity $$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$ using the vector triple product. Some express confusion about how to apply the vector triple product to this identity.

Discussion Status

Several participants have offered insights and attempted different approaches to prove the identity. There is a mix of understanding and confusion, with some participants questioning the validity of certain steps and others suggesting alternative methods. The discussion remains active with no clear consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of understanding the properties of the cross product, such as its anti-commutative nature and the distinction between scalar and vector triple products. There are references to specific proofs and attempts to clarify misconceptions regarding associativity.

Saitama
Messages
4,244
Reaction score
93
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Pranav-Arora said:
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

First, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V} \cdot \mathbf{W}<br /> = \mathbf{U} \cdot \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W}[/tex]
for any three vectors U, V, W. (Note: UxV.W means (UxV).W, etc). In other words, in a mixed vector-scalar product you can interchange the 'x' and the '.'. It is pretty easy to prove, just by expanding out both things and comparing the results.

Next, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})<br /> = (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex] just by using ##\mathbf{R} \times \mathbf{S} = -\mathbf{S} \times \mathbf{R}## and applying the vector triple product you are already given.

Now apply these two facts to your problem.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Pranav-Arora said:
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

First interchange the signs of '×' and '.'

$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D) = A\times B \times C \cdot D$$

Which gives

$$[(A \cdot C)B - (B \cdot C)A] \cdot D $$

And finally,

$$[(A \cdot C)(B \cdot D) - (B \cdot C)(A \cdot D)] $$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Ray Vickson said:
First, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V} \cdot \mathbf{W}<br /> = \mathbf{U} \cdot \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W}[/tex]
for any three vectors U, V, W. (Note: UxV.W means (UxV).W, etc). In other words, in a mixed vector-scalar product you can interchange the 'x' and the '.'. It is pretty easy to prove, just by expanding out both things and comparing the results.
Thanks, didn't notice that it was a scalar triple product. :)

Next, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})<br /> = (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex] just by using ##\mathbf{R} \times \mathbf{S} = -\mathbf{S} \times \mathbf{R}## and applying the vector triple product you are already given.

Now apply these two facts to your problem.

I did not require this in proving what I wanted to but still I would like to know how would you prove this. Here's how I tried:

Applying the vector triple product on LHS:
$$V(U\cdot W)-W(U\cdot V)$$

The RHS is:
$$-W \times (U \times V)$$
$$=-(U(W\cdot V)-V(W \cdot U))$$
$$=V(W \cdot U)-U(W\cdot V)$$

They don't turn out to be the same. :confused:
 
Ray Vickson said:
Next, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})<br /> = (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex]
That's just wrong, Ray. The cross product is not associative.
 
Pranav-Arora said:
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$
You can use both the scalar triple product and vector triple product to prove this identity. Denote ##U=C \times D##. With this substitution, ##(A \times B) \cdot (C \times D) = (A \times B) \cdot U##. See if you can take it from here, using the scalar triple product and then the vector triple product.
 
D H said:
You can use both the scalar triple product and vector triple product to prove this identity. Denote ##U=C \times D##. With this substitution, ##(A \times B) \cdot (C \times D) = (A \times B) \cdot U##. See if you can take it from here, using the scalar triple product and then the vector triple product.

I did exactly the same to prove it. I stated it in my previous reply.

$$(A \times B)\cdot U=A\cdot (B\times (C\times D))$$
$$=A\cdot(C(B\cdot D)-D(B\cdot C))=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I have a few more doubts regarding vector proofs but they involve the del operator, should I post them here even though it is a precalculus section?
 
Pranav-Arora said:
I did exactly the same to prove it. I stated it in my previous reply.
Sorry, I didn't see that post. I saw your post where you trued (but failed) to prove the associativity of the cross product.

[EDIT]: That should be tried, not trued.

The cross product is not associative in general. Since the cross product is anti-commutative, ##(A \times B) \times C = - C \times (A \times B) = C \times (B \times A)##. Now this is in a form where you can use the vector triple product rule: ##(A \times B) \times C = C \times (B \times A) = B (A \cdot C) - A (B \cdot C)##. The difference between ##A \times (B \times C)## and ##(A \times B) \times C## is thus ##A \times (B \times C) - (A \times B) \times C = C (A \cdot B) - A (B \cdot C)##. This is zero if both ##A \cdot B## and ##B \cdot C## are zero or if C is parallel to A (i.e., ##C=\alpha A## where alpha is a scalar). The difference is non-zero otherwise, and hence the two forms are not equal to one another in general.

Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.
I have a few more doubts regarding vector proofs but they involve the del operator, should I post them here even though it is a precalculus section?
It's best to post those questions in the calculus section.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
D H said:
Sorry, I didn't see that post. I saw your post where you trued (but failed) to prove the associativity of the cross product.

The cross product is not associative in general. Since the cross product is anti-commutative, ##(A \times B) \times C = - C \times (A \times B) = C \times (B \times A)##. Now this is in a form where you can use the vector triple product rule: ##(A \times B) \times C = C \times (B \times A) = B (A \cdot C) - A (B \cdot C)##. The difference between ##A \times (B \times C)## and ##(A \times B) \times C## is thus ##A \times (B \times C) - (A \times B) \times C = C (A \cdot B) - A (B \cdot C)##. This is zero if both ##A \cdot B## and ##B \cdot C## are zero or if C is parallel to A (i.e., ##C=\alpha A## where alpha is a scalar). The difference is non-zero otherwise, and hence the two forms are not equal to one another in general.

Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.

Thanks a lot DH for such wonderful tips. I have made a note of these. :smile:
 
  • #10
D H said:
Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.
A couple more points on this. One is that since ##U \times (V \times U) = (U \times V) \times U## the parentheses can be omitted in this case: It's okay to write ##U \times V \times U##. Note that writing ##U \times V \times W## is *not* okay. Parentheses are needed in the general case.

The other is that one reason this comes up quite often is that it is closely related to the component of V that is perpendicular to U, which I'll designate as ##V_{\perp_U}##. One way to calculate the component of V that is normal to U is to subtract the projection of V onto U from V. The projection is given by ##\frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##, and thus the normal component is ##V_{\perp_U} = V - \frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2} = \frac{V (U \cdot U) - U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##. The numerator is ##U\times (V \times U) = U \times V \times U##. Thus ##V_{\perp_U} = \frac {U \times V \times U}{U^2}##. If U is a unit vector, this reduces to ##U \times V \times U##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #11
D H said:
A couple more points on this. One is that since ##U \times (V \times U) = (U \times V) \times U## the parentheses can be omitted in this case: It's okay to write ##U \times V \times U##. Note that writing ##U \times V \times W## is *not* okay. Parentheses are needed in the general case.

The other is that one reason this comes up quite often is that it is closely related to the component of V that is perpendicular to U, which I'll designate as ##V_{\perp_U}##. One way to calculate the component of V that is normal to U is to subtract the projection of V onto U from V. The projection is given by ##\frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##, and thus the normal component is ##V_{\perp_U} = V - \frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2} = \frac{V (U \cdot U) - U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##. The numerator is ##U\times (V \times U) = U \times V \times U##. Thus ##V_{\perp_U} = \frac {U \times V \times U}{U^2}##. If U is a unit vector, this reduces to ##U \times V \times U##.

Thank you once again D H! :)
 
  • #12
Pranav-Arora said:
Thanks, didn't notice that it was a scalar triple product. :)



I did not require this in proving what I wanted to but still I would like to know how would you prove this. Here's how I tried:

Applying the vector triple product on LHS:
$$V(U\cdot W)-W(U\cdot V)$$

The RHS is:
$$-W \times (U \times V)$$
$$=-(U(W\cdot V)-V(W \cdot U))$$
$$=V(W \cdot U)-U(W\cdot V)$$

They don't turn out to be the same. :confused:

You are right, sorry. Anyway, you don't need anything like that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K