How to find the magnitude of this bivector?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dimension10
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Magnitude
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the magnitude of a bivector expressed as a linear combination of wedge products of unit vectors. Participants explore different interpretations of the notation and the mathematical framework involved, including the potential use of cross products and exterior algebra.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asks how to find the magnitude of a specific bivector involving constants A, B, and C.
  • Another participant suggests that the wedges might be interpreted as cross products and references a Wikipedia article for clarification.
  • Some participants propose that the discussion may involve exterior algebra and suggest defining an inner product to calculate the norm of the bivector.
  • There is a mention of the three wedge products potentially forming an orthonormal basis, but this is questioned due to the unknown coefficients A, B, and C.
  • Concerns are raised about the calculation of determinants involving non-square matrices when trying to express the bivector in a certain form.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the orthonormal basis and the conditions under which the magnitude would be defined.
  • One participant suggests a formula for the norm and questions whether it applies to bivectors as well as vectors.
  • Another participant clarifies that the norm definition is assumed unless specified otherwise, and discusses the nature of the inner product as a generalization of the dot product.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the wedge products and whether they form an orthonormal basis. There is no consensus on how to proceed with the calculation of the magnitude or the definitions involved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations regarding the assumptions about the coefficients A, B, and C, and the implications for defining an orthonormal basis. The discussion also touches on the need for clarity in the definitions of norms and inner products in the context of bivectors.

dimension10
Messages
371
Reaction score
0
How does one find the value of

[tex]||A \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right) +B(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{k})+C( \hat{\jmath}\wedge\hat{k})||[/tex]

Where A, B and C are constant coefficients.


Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It could also be that you actually did mean wedges and that you're working with the exterior algebra. In that case, you can define an inner product as follows

[tex]\langle v\wedge w,v^\prime\wedge w^\prime\rangle= det\left(\begin{array}{cc} \langle v,v^\prime\rangle & \langle v,w^\prime\rangle\\ \langle w,v^\prime\rangle & \langle w,w^\prime\rangle \end{array}\right)[/tex]

Under this inner product, can you now calculate the norm in your example?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exterior_algebra for more details.
 
micromass said:
It could also be that you actually did mean wedges and that you're working with the exterior algebra. In that case, you can define an inner product as follows

[tex]\langle v\wedge w,v^\prime\wedge w^\prime\rangle= det\left(\begin{array}{cc} \langle v,v^\prime\rangle & \langle v,w^\prime\rangle\\ \langle w,v^\prime\rangle & \langle w,w^\prime\rangle \end{array}\right)[/tex]

Under this inner product, can you now calculate the norm in your example?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exterior_algebra for more details.

Thanks. However, I don't see any way to express the bivector in that way.
 
Last edited:
dimension10 said:
Thanks. However, I don't see any way to express the bivector in that way.

Ah, okay.
So it's a generalization of the cross product.

Well, it says here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exterior_algebra#Inner_product
that the 3 wedge products you have in your problem form an orthonormal basis.

And I take it the norm would be defined to be the square root of the bivector with itself?
 
I like Serena said:
Ah, okay.
So it's a generalization of the cross product.

Well, it says here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exterior_algebra#Inner_product
that the 3 wedge products you have in your problem form an orthonormal basis.

And I take it the norm would be defined to be the square root of the bivector with itself?

But if I were to do that, then I would obtain a 2 by 3 matrix to take the determinant of and determinants are not defined for non-square matrices...
 
dimension10 said:
But if I were to do that, then I would obtain a 2 by 3 matrix to take the determinant of and determinants are not defined for non-square matrices...

How do you get a 2 by 3 matrix? :confused:

Note that "orthonormal basis" says it all... no need to take any determinants...
 
I like Serena said:
How do you get a 2 by 3 matrix? :confused:

Note that "orthonormal basis" says it all... no need to take any determinants...

I don't exactly get how it is an orthonormal basis since A, B, and C are unknown coefficients.

If it were an orthonormal basis, then the magnitude would be 1, but I don't think this will be an orthonormal basis.
 
dimension10 said:
I don't exactly get how it is an orthonormal basis since A, B, and C are unknown coefficients.

If it were an orthonormal basis, then the magnitude would be 1, but I don't think this will be an orthonormal basis.

Yes, A, B, and C are unknown scalar coefficients.

And:
[tex]\langle \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right), \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right) \rangle = 1[/tex][tex] \langle \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right), (\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{k}) \rangle = 0[/tex]
 
  • #10
I like Serena said:
Yes, A, B, and C are unknown scalar coefficients.

And:
[tex]\langle \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right), \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right) \rangle = 1[/tex][tex] \langle \left(\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{\jmath}\right), (\hat{\imath}\wedge\hat{k}) \rangle = 0[/tex]

But to get the bivector into that form, I would need to get the scalars outside the magnitude signs somehow...
 
  • #11
Perhaps you can use the following?
[tex]||x||=\sqrt{\langle x, x \rangle}[/tex][tex] \langle ax+by, z \rangle = a\langle x, z \rangle + b\langle y, z \rangle[/tex]
 
  • #12
I like Serena said:
Perhaps you can use the following?
[tex]||x||=\sqrt{\langle x, x \rangle}[/tex][tex] \langle ax+by, z \rangle = a\langle x, z \rangle + b\langle y, z \rangle[/tex]

Oh, so that is true for bivectors too? I thought it was true only for vectors! Thanks.
 
  • #13
dimension10 said:
Oh, so that is true for bivectors too? I thought it was true only for vectors! Thanks.

The first is the "usual" definition of the norm.
Since you did not specify you were using another one (and there are many others), this one is assumed.

The second is part of the definition of the inner product, which is the generalized version of the dot product.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K