MHB How to Express Vectors of a Regular Hexagon in Terms of Given Components?

anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
ABCDEF is a regular hexagon with $\vec {BC}$ represents $\underline {b}$ and $\vec {FC}$ represents 2$\underline {a}$. Express, vector
$\vec {AB}$, $\vec {CD}$ and $\vec {EC}$ in terms of $\underline {a}$ and $\underline {b}$.

Before I start, I want to ask if we need to redefined $\underline {b}$ and 2$\underline {a}$? I mean, let $\underline {b}$ as

$$\begin{pmatrix} m \\0 \end{pmatrix}$$.

Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You don't have to express $\underline{a}$ and $\underline{b}$ using their coordinates, though it's possible to get the answer that way as well. Suppose $\underline{a}=(k,l)$ and $\underline{b}=(m,0)$ and you express, say, $\vec{AB}$ using k, l and m. The difficulty is that you need express $\vec{AB}$ as a combination of specifically $(k,l)$ and $(m,0)$, not just as some expression of k, l and m.

It is clear that $\vec{EC}=\vec{FB}=\vec{FC}-\vec{BC}=2\underline{a}-\underline{b}$. To get a geometric intuition about the regular hexagon you can also look at this page.
 
Hello, anemone!

I don't understand the notation $\underline{b}$.
If $\underline{b}$ represents $\overrightarrow{BC}$, isn't $b$ also a vector?

$ABCDEF\text{ is a regular hexagon with }\vec{b} = \overrightarrow {BC}\text{ and }2\vec{a} = \overrightarrow{FC} $

$\text{Express vectors }\overrightarrow{AB},\;\overrightarrow{CD},\; \overrightarrow{EC}\text{ in terms of }\vec{a}\text{ and }\vec{b}.$
Code:
          A       B
          * - - - *
         / \     / \
        /   \   /   \ b
       /  a  \ /  a  \
    F * - - - * - - - * C
       \     / \     /
        \   /   \   /
         \ /     \ /
          * - - - *
          E       D

$\overrightarrow{AB} \:=\:\vec{a}$

$\overrightarrow{CD} \:=\:\vec{b} - \vec{a}$

$\overrightarrow{EC} \:=\:2\vec{a} - \vec{b}$
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
You don't have to express $\underline{a}$ and $\underline{b}$ using their coordinates, though it's possible to get the answer that way as well. Suppose $\underline{a}=(k,l)$ and $\underline{b}=(m,0)$ and you express, say, $\vec{AB}$ using k, l and m. The difficulty is that you need express $\vec{AB}$ as a combination of specifically $(k,l)$ and $(m,0)$, not just as some expression of k, l and m.

It is clear that $\vec{EC}=\vec{FB}=\vec{FC}-\vec{BC}=2\underline{a}-\underline{b}$. To get a geometric intuition about the regular hexagon you can also look at this page.

Got it. Thanks, Evgeny.Makarov.
Maybe I'm just trying too hard...and not knowing that I'm actually trying to complicate the simple problem.

---------- Post added at 06:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:59 AM ----------

soroban said:
I don't understand the notation $\underline{b}$.
If $\underline{b}$ represents $\overrightarrow{BC}$, isn't $b$ also a vector?

I had the same reaction as you when I first read the problem!
Anyway, thanks, Soroban.
Now I fully understand with the help of the diagram and it really is as simple as that.:)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top