I How deep does it need to go for a physics theory to be consistent?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Aleberto69
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Griffiths Vectors
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the adequacy of basic mathematical structures, such as those presented in Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics," for explaining vectors and pseudovectors without delving into advanced mathematics like group theory. Participants express confusion over the definitions and behaviors of vectors and pseudovectors, particularly regarding the cross product and coordinate transformations. There is debate about whether the Cartesian basis vectors should be classified as vectors or pseudovectors, with some arguing that the treatment of these concepts in introductory texts may be oversimplified or misleading. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding how different authors define terms and the implications of coordinate system transformations on vector properties. Ultimately, the need for a consistent and clear framework for understanding these concepts is emphasized.
  • #51
Aleberto69 said:
2) Still waiting arumenting if the result of i x j is a pseudovector
That's been fully explained. The basis vectors are dimensionless. They are vectors by definition.
 
Back
Top