Is A x [B x (C x D)] Always Equal to Zero?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SAMIA
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof of the expression A x [B x (C x D)] and whether it is always equal to zero, focusing on vector operations, specifically the cross product in three-dimensional space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants suggest testing the expression with various vectors and discuss the properties of the cross product, including its distributive nature. There is also a consideration of the dimensionality of the vectors involved.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes hints and suggestions for exploration, with some participants expressing skepticism about the validity of the original claim. There are multiple interpretations being explored, particularly regarding the conditions under which the expression might hold true.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the requirement for participants to demonstrate their attempts before receiving assistance, as well as a mention of the dimensionality of the vectors being in R3.

SAMIA
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello I hope you can help me in solving this proof

proved A x [B x (Cx D) ] = 0


Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Samia, welcome to PF. Since this is your first post you may not have read the rules, one of which is you must show what you have tried. Nevertheless I will give you a Hint: Try the calculation with 4 different vectors.
 
LCKurtz said:
Hello Samia, welcome to PF. Since this is your first post you may not have read the rules, one of which is you must show what you have tried. Nevertheless I will give you a Hint: Try the calculation with 4 different vectors.

that's just...cruel.

presumably A,B,C and D lie in R3?

if so, A must be a linear combination of B,C, and D.

the cross-product is distributive, is it not?

from here it get easy...because of a certain elementary property of cross-products.
 
Deveno said:
that's just...cruel.

presumably A,B,C and D lie in R3?

if so, A must be a linear combination of B,C, and D.

the cross-product is distributive, is it not?

from here it get easy...because of a certain elementary property of cross-products.

How does it get easy when it is false? And what is cruel about suggesting that most anything will give a counterexample?
 
LCKurtz said:
How does it get easy when it is false? And what is cruel about suggesting that most anything will give a counterexample?

except, obviously, for the ones i tried. please excuse me while i shave my facial omelette.
 
This theorem can't be proved, because (as noted by LCKurtz) it is simply false. A simple counter can be shown by letting A=B=C=i, D=j where i,j, and k are the unit vectors in the x,y, and z directions (respectively). Then

A x (B x (C x D))=i x (i x (i x j))
=i x (i x (k))
=i x (-j)
A x (B x (C x D))=-k0
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K