Inner product orthogonal vectors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding two unit vectors orthogonal to the vectors u = (2, 1, -4, 0), v = (-1, -1, 2, 2), and w = (3, 2, 5, 4) in R4 using the Euclidean inner product. The user attempted to derive a solution through a system of linear equations but encountered discrepancies with the textbook answers. The general solution derived was t(-310/3, 4/3, -154/3, 1), which does not yield unit vectors, indicating a need for normalization to meet the problem's requirements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Euclidean inner product in R4
  • Knowledge of linear equations and systems
  • Familiarity with vector normalization
  • Basic skills in solving for orthogonal vectors
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn how to normalize vectors in R4
  • Study methods for solving systems of linear equations
  • Explore the properties of orthogonal vectors in higher dimensions
  • Investigate the Gram-Schmidt process for orthogonalization
USEFUL FOR

Students in linear algebra, mathematicians working with vector spaces, and anyone studying orthogonality in higher-dimensional spaces.

derryck1234
Messages
55
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let R4 have the Euclidean inner product. Find two unit vectors that are orthogonal to the three vectors

u = (2, 1, -4, 0) ; v = (-1, -1, 2, 2) ; w = (3, 2, 5, 4)

Homework Equations



<u, v> = u1v1 + u2v2 + u3v3 + u4v4 = 0 {orthogonal}

The Attempt at a Solution



There is no example in the textbook for this kind of problem.

What I thought of doing was making three sets of linear equations. By letting a orthogonal vector be = (x, y, z, w), therefore:

2x + y - 4z = 0
-x -y + 2z + 2w = 0
3x + 2y + 5z + 4w = 0

The general solution to which I found to be:

t(-310/3, 4/3, -154/3, 1)

This does not agree with the back of the textbook?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That might be because what you wrote is not a unit vector (which is what the problem asks for). [That is to say, t is not completely arbitrary...]

Now that I check, you'll find that your components do not solve the second and third of your linear equations (especially not the third one!).

[Small hint: you should be getting 11's in your denominators.]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K