High School Mistake when explaining associativity of vector addition

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the associativity of vector addition, specifically questioning a method of visualizing the operation. It clarifies that vector addition can be performed by placing the tip of one vector to the tail of another, leading to the same resultant vector regardless of the order of addition. The explanation emphasizes that both a + (b+c) and (b+c) + a yield the same result when vectors are applied at the same point. The notation simplifies the process by omitting the starting points of vectors, which does not affect the outcome. Ultimately, the discussion resolves the initial confusion regarding the method used in the explanation of associativity.
CynicusRex
Gold Member
Messages
98
Reaction score
68


Does he make a mistake at 6:18?

In case of associativity. When doing a+(b+c) he's just placing the tip of a to the tail of (b+c), but shouldn't he have added the tail of a to the tip of (b+c) ending in a different point? I understand vector addition is associative, but I think how he did it is incorrect by accident. As far as I understand, this is how I see it:
bkV2hu8.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
He is right. He calculates ##a + (b+c)##, i.e. ##(b+c) = v## first and then ##a + v##. Your suggestion is ##v + a##.
To add vectors, you have to apply them at the same point (and get a diagonal of a parallelogram) or concatenate them (and get the same diagonal). So even ##v + a## will lead to the same result, when applied to the origin.

The whole vector addition is already an abbreviation, since a vector should be ##(P_v,v)## where ##P_v## is the point the vector is applied to, i.e. where it starts. So
$$a + (b+c) = (P_a,a) + ((P_b,b) + (P_c, c)) = (P_a,a) + ((P_b,b) + (P_b +b, c)) = (P_a,a) + (P_b, b+c)) = (P_a, a+(b+c))$$
which is associative and commutative. So no matter how you write it, it's always the same result. Since parallel transport along straight lines doesn't change the resulting vectors, we drop the points where the vectors apply to in the notation for simplification.
 
  • Like
Likes CynicusRex
Ah okay, I understand my error. Thank you.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K