Lin Alg Question: Cross-Product Proof

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChaoticLlama
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the properties of the cross product of vectors, specifically addressing the claim that if the cross product of two vectors a and b equals zero, then one of the vectors must be zero. Participants argue that if a is non-zero and a × b = 0, it implies that b is parallel to a, not necessarily that b is zero. The example of a × 2a is used to illustrate that two parallel vectors result in a zero cross product, reinforcing that non-zero vectors can still yield a zero result. Ultimately, the conclusion drawn is that the condition a × (b - c) = 0 indicates that b - c is parallel to a, rather than asserting that either vector must be zero. This highlights the nuanced understanding of vector relationships in linear algebra.
ChaoticLlama
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
http://imgur.com/mceBq"

I'm curious to see if my conclusion is correct.

thanks in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't really agree with your claim that if for two vectors a (non-zero) and b, axb = 0, then b = 0.
 
Following up with what CompuChip said, what is a X 2a?
 
CompuChip said:
I don't really agree with your claim that if for two vectors a (non-zero) and b, axb = 0, then b = 0.

I'm not sure why you don't agree. I end up with the statement:

a X (b - c) = 0

And for that statement to hold, the following must necessarily be true:

b - c = 0

since we know that a is nonzero.

Mark44 said:
Following up with what CompuChip said, what is a X 2a?

a is parallel to 2a, so taking the cross-product of two parallel vectors yields the zero vector, because there are an infinite number of vectors perpendicular to a single line.


Sorry, but I don't seem to be following the logic you are trying to lead me through.
 
The logic he is trying to lead you through is: Since, as you say, the cross product of two parallel vectors is 0, it does NOT follow that is u\times v= 0 then either u or v must be 0! In particular, if a is not the 0 vector, then neither is 2a but, again, a\times 2a= 0.

If a\times (b- c)= 0 then the best you can say is that b- c is parallel to a: that is, that b- c is a multiple of a.
 
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...
Essentially I just have this problem that I'm stuck on, on a sheet about complex numbers: Show that, for ##|r|<1,## $$1+r\cos(x)+r^2\cos(2x)+r^3\cos(3x)...=\frac{1-r\cos(x)}{1-2r\cos(x)+r^2}$$ My first thought was to express it as a geometric series, where the real part of the sum of the series would be the series you see above: $$1+re^{ix}+r^2e^{2ix}+r^3e^{3ix}...$$ The sum of this series is just: $$\frac{(re^{ix})^n-1}{re^{ix} - 1}$$ I'm having some trouble trying to figure out what to...
Back
Top