Is Vector Division Possible in Mathematics?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cooper607
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Division Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of vector division in mathematics, specifically whether it is possible to divide one vector by another to obtain a third vector. Participants explore various aspects of vector operations, including dot and cross products, and the implications of these operations in different contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that vector division is not possible in the classical sense, particularly in the context of obtaining a third vector from two others.
  • One participant discusses the dot product and suggests that while you can express relationships between vectors, additional information is needed to determine one vector from another.
  • Another participant elaborates on the cross product, noting that while you can find a vector orthogonal to a given vector, the solution is not unique and depends on additional parameters.
  • Concerns are raised about special cases, such as when the resulting vector is zero, which complicates the analysis of vector relationships.
  • Participants highlight that the concept of division lacks a multiplicative identity in vector operations, which further complicates the notion of vector division.
  • Some participants mention practical applications of these concepts in fields like angular momentum and electromagnetism, suggesting that while the theoretical framework is complex, there may be useful insights to be gained.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the possibility and implications of vector division, with multiple competing views presented. The discussion remains unresolved, as no consensus is reached regarding the validity or utility of vector division.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific definitions of vector operations, the uniqueness of solutions in vector relationships, and the challenges posed by special cases such as zero vectors and non-orthogonal vectors.

cooper607
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
hi guys,
i have a basic question on vector division..can i divide a vector by another vector to get the third vector.. i know, if it is scalar product then i can not do the reverse engineering but what happens with the vector products?
like v=wxr
can i get r(both direction and quantity) by dividing v by w?

i got p=F/A, where 3 of them are vectors...
so how is it possible ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cooper607 said:
can i divide a vector by another vector to get the third vector.
No.

like v=wxr
can i get r(both direction and quantity) by dividing v by w?
No.
 
Hmmm... let's see what we can do.

Suppose you have a dot product a.x = A where a and x are vectors and A is some number.

Now, given a and A, what can we say about x?

Well a.x = |a||x|cos(theta), where theta is the angle between a and x.

So |a||x|cos(theta) = A

For a non-zero, we can say |x|cos(theta) = A/|a|

Frankly, that's as much as we can say given a dot product. You'll need extra information about x in order to do the "division".

Now, given the direction of x, you can find theta and hence the length there by finding x.
In 2D, if you're given the length then you can find theta using the above and you're done.
For higher dimensions however, knowing just the length won't be enough but if you know in addition which plane it lies in then you're good.

What about the cross product? Well, suppose a X y = b, where a, y and b are vectors.

Given a and b, what can we say about y?

Well, for b non-zero we know that y is orthogonal to b, so we at the very least we have a plane in which to find y.

Also |a||y|sin(theta) = |b| where theta is the angle between a and y.

Hence using this, if you know either the length of y or the angle it makes with a, then you can effectively do the division.

Lastly if b is zero the you have one of the following cases:
1) a is zero, so y could be any vector
2) a is non-zero and hence y points in the same direction as a (so knowing the length of y will determine your solution)

So yeah, I wouldn't really say you can do "division" in the classical sense, but you can at least make some progress. Hope that helps :)
 
Last edited:
Marioeden said:
What about the cross product? Well, suppose a X y = b, where a, y and b are vectors.

Given a and b, what can we say about y?

Well, we know that y is orthogonal to b, so we at the very least we have a plane in which to find y.
Not necessarily. y is also orthogonal to the zero vector, so if a and y happen to have the same direction, then b will be 0. In this case you don't have a plane to work with.
 
Mark44 said:
Not necessarily. y is also orthogonal to the zero vector, so if a and y happen to have the same direction, then b will be 0. In this case you don't have a plane to work with.

Ah yes, sorry I missed the special case where b is zero.
 
cooper607 said:
hi guys,
i have a basic question on vector division..can i divide a vector by another vector to get the third vector.. i know, if it is scalar product then i can not do the reverse engineering but what happens with the vector products?
like v=wxr
can i get r(both direction and quantity) by dividing v by w?
No, because there are many different vectors, r, such that wxr= v for given v and w?

i got p=F/A, where 3 of them are vectors...
so how is it possible ?
I have no idea what your "p", "F", and "A" are.
 
Marioeden said:
Ah yes, sorry I missed the special case where b is zero.
It's not just b being zero. Given your \vec a \times \vec y = \vec b where \vec a and \vec b are orthogonal to one another, suppose you find some \vec y that satisfies this expression. Then any other vector \vec y' = \vec y + \alpha \vec a where \alpha is an arbitrary scalar will satisfy \vec a \times \vec y' = \vec b.

One solution is \vec y = \frac{\vec b \times \vec a}{||\vec a||^2}. As noted above, this isn't unique.

Another problem is that this only works with vectors in ℝ3 because the cross product is special to ℝ3. It doesn't generalize. It's really hard to call this "division".

Yet another problem: What if \vec a and \vec b are not orthogonal to one another? What is \vec b / \vec a in this case?

Yet another problem: What's the multiplicative identity? How can you call any operation division if there is no multiplicative identity?
 
Last edited:
D H said:
It's not just b being zero. Given your \vec a \times \vec y = \vec b where \vec a and \vec b are orthogonal to one another, suppose you find some \vec y that satisfies this expression. Then any other vector \vec y' = \vec y + \alpha \vec a where \alpha is an arbitrary scalar will satisfy \vec a \times \vec y' = \vec b.

One solution is \vec y = \frac{\vec b \times \vec a}{||\vec a||^2}. As noted above, this isn't unique.

Another problem is that this only works with vectors in ℝ3 because the cross product is special to ℝ3. It doesn't generalize. It's really hard to call this "division".

Yet another problem: What if itex]\vec a[/itex] and \vec b are not orthogonal to one another? What is \vec b / \vec a in this case?

Yet another problem: What's the multiplicative identity? How can you call any operation division if there is no multiplicative identity?

Oh, I'm not doing this from anywhere near a mathematically rigorous point of view (far to many subtleties as you've mentioned), wouldn't know where to begin with constructing anything sensible. I'm simply stating the best you can do with the information you've been given (and even then there isn't much).

It may not seem particularly useful, but when dealing with angular momentum or Electromagnetism it can be a good starting point for some problems.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K