Is this all correct? (more bl dy vectors)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dr Zoidburg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vectors
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around verifying the correctness of calculations related to a line equation and points in three-dimensional space. The participant confirms that point Q (2,1,2) does not lie on line P, as substituting the coordinates into the line's equation yields inconsistent results. The parametric equations for line P are established as x=2t-3, y=t, and z=t-1. The method to find point R, which is perpendicular to line P from point Q, involves using the dot product, leading to the conclusion that R's coordinates are (5/3, 7/3, 4/3). The conversation highlights the importance of correctly identifying vectors and emphasizes a simpler approach to solving the problem.
Dr Zoidburg
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
Is this all correct? (more bl**dy vectors!)

I hope these are right, but I have the nagging suspicion that they're not? Where have I gone wrong (if I have indeed gone wrong)?

Homework Statement


line P has equation (x+3)/2 = y = z-1
(a) Show that point Q (2,1,2) does not lie on line P.
(b) Write down the parametric equations for the line.
(c) Use dot product properties to find the co-ords of point R which is on P, such that QR is perpendicular to P.


The Attempt at a Solution


(a) sub (2,1,2) into the equation:
(2+3)/2 = 1 = 2-1
5/2 = 1 = 1
they don't equal, therefore point Q does not lie on line P.
Is it that simple, or do I need to use [v(P) = (-3,0,1) + t(2,1,1)] and the parametric equations such that x=2t-3=2, y=t=1 & z=t+1=2 and attempt a solution. Here it is inconsistent.

(b) parametric equations:
x=2t-3
y=t
z=t-1

(c) dot product:
let u = (2,1,2) and v=(-3,0,1)
u.v = (2 1 2).(-3 0 1) |i 2 -3 |
= det |j 1 0 | = i - 8j + 3k
|k 2 1 |
point R = (1, -8, 3).
again, I feel I've skipped a step here, but it's 11.30pm and I'm too tired to think any further!

many thanks in advance! I'll be checking again in the am.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dr Zoidburg said:
I hope these are right, but I have the nagging suspicion that they're not? Where have I gone wrong (if I have indeed gone wrong)?

Homework Statement


line P has equation (x+3)/2 = y = z-1
(a) Show that point Q (2,1,2) does not lie on line P.
(b) Write down the parametric equations for the line.
(c) Use dot product properties to find the co-ords of point R which is on P, such that QR is perpendicular to P.


The Attempt at a Solution


(a) sub (2,1,2) into the equation:
(2+3)/2 = 1 = 2-1
5/2 = 1 = 1
they don't equal, therefore point Q does not lie on line P.
Is it that simple, or do I need to use [v(P) = (-3,0,1) + t(2,1,1)] and the parametric equations such that x=2t-3=2, y=t=1 & z=t+1=2 and attempt a solution. Here it is inconsistent.
Yes, it really is that simple!


(b) parametric equations:
x=2t-3
y=t
z=t-1
I presume you just set (x+3)/2 = y = z-1= t. Yes, that's correct.

(c) dot product

let u = (2,1,2) and v=(-3,0,1)
u.v = (2 1 2).(-3 0 1) |i 2 -3 |
= det |j 1 0 | = i - 8j + 3k
|k 2 1 |
point R = (1, -8, 3).
again, I feel I've skipped a step here, but it's 11.30pm and I'm too tired to think any further!
u= (2 1 2) is the "position vector" of Q but where did you get (-3 0 1)? It is NOT the direction vector of P, which is (2, 1, 1). It is the position vector of a point on the line (when t= 0) but that is pretty much an arbitrary vector. In fact, it is easy to check that you "R" does not even satisfy the equations to lie on P!

I would have done this differently. Let R be the point (x, y, z)= (2t- 3, t, t-1), on P. Then the vector from Q to R is given by (2t-3- 2, t- 1, t-1- 2)= (2t- 5, t-1, t- 3). The line from R to Q will be perpendicular to P as long as that vector is perpendicular to the direction vector of P: we must have (2t-5, t-1, t-3)\cdot(2, 1, 1)= 0. That gives 4t- 10+ t- 1+ t- 3= 0 or 6t= 14. t= 14/6= 7/3. Putting that back into the equations for R, R= (5/3, 7/3, 4/3).

As a check on the arithmetic, the vector from Q to R is (4/3- 2, 7/3- 1, 4/3- 2)= (-1/3, 4/3, -2/3). It's dot product with (2, 1, 1) is -2/3+ 4/3- 2/3= 0.

many thanks in advance! I'll be checking again in the am.
 
thanks a lot for that.
I have this problem of always thinking the solution has to be more complex than it appears to be!
I really must go out and buy another Occam's razor. Mine's obviously too blunt and ain't working as well as it should.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Putting that back into the equations for R, R= (5/3, 7/3, 4/3).

As a check on the arithmetic, the vector from Q to R is (4/3- 2, 7/3- 1, 4/3- 2)= (-1/3, 4/3, -2/3). It's dot product with (2, 1, 1) is -2/3+ 4/3- 2/3= 0.
very minor quibble here: shouldn't that 4/3 be 5/3 ? :wink:
 
Yes, of course it should.
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...
Back
Top