MHB Perpendicular vectors, triangle, tetrahedron

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving a mathematical statement involving vectors and their relationships in geometric configurations. It establishes that if (c - b).a = 0 and (c - a).b = 0, then (b - a).c = 0, which is foundational for demonstrating that the altitudes of triangle ABC intersect at a point and that in tetrahedron OABC, if two pairs of opposite edges are perpendicular, the third pair must also be perpendicular. Participants express confusion about how to derive perpendicular vectors related to triangle sides and the concept of opposite edges in tetrahedra. A methodical approach to solving these problems is suggested, emphasizing working backwards from the desired results. Overall, the thread highlights the importance of understanding vector relationships in geometric proofs.
furor celtica
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
Prove that, if (c - b).a = 0 and (c - a).b = 0, then (b - a).c = 0. Show that this can be used to prove the following geometric results:
a. The lines through the vertices of a triangle ABC perpendicular to the opposite sides meet in a point.
b. If the tetrahedron OABC has two pairs of perpendicular opposite edges, the third pair of edges is perpendicular.
Prove that also, in both cases, (OA)^2 + (BC)^2 = (OB)^2 + (CA)^2 = (OC)^2 + (AB)^2So for the very first task I proceeded by attributing coordinates to each vector: a = (x(1), y(1), z(1)), b = (x(2), y(2), z(2), c = (x(3), y(3), z(3)), where the numbers are actually at the bottom left of the coordinates, but I don't know how to use that notation here.
Anyway I could post all my work but it would take a long time; I didn't have much of a problem at all with the first task and proved that (b - a).c = 0. It took a while though, as you can imagine; is there another way to solve problems like this, or does one always have to use attributed coordinates and deal with those?

With a. and b. I'm stuck, however.
a. I usually would try to solve a question like this by taking into account the end result and what exactly I'm supposed to end up with (and often work backwards to return to the given results), but here I'm not sure at all what you end up with algebraically when three vectors meet. What am I looking for? Also I'm confused on how to find the vectors that are perpendicular to the opposite sides, how to formulate them with regard to the coordinates of A, B and C.
b. Here I immediately became confused as to what is meant by 'opposite edges'. But besides that it seems to be a fairly straightforward variation of the very first task, am I correct?
The last task seems simple as well, as I would just take the attributed coordinates and reformulate the magnitudes of the given vectors to be equivalent, perhaps with some help from the result in the first task. I haven't tackled this one yet.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
furorceltica said:
Prove that, if (c - b).a = 0 and (c - a).b = 0, then (b - a).c = 0. Show that this can be used to prove the following geometric results:
a. The lines through the vertices of a triangle ABC perpendicular to the opposite sides meet in a point.
b. If the tetrahedron OABC has two pairs of perpendicular opposite edges, the third pair of edges is perpendicular.
Prove that also, in both cases, (OA)^2 + (BC)^2 = (OB)^2 + (CA)^2 = (OC)^2 + (AB)^2So for the very first task I proceeded by attributing coordinates to each vector: a = (x(1), y(1), z(1)), b = (x(2), y(2), z(2), c = (x(3), y(3), z(3)), where the numbers are actually at the bottom left of the coordinates, but I don't know how to use that notation here.
Anyway I could post all my work but it would take a long time; I didn't have much of a problem at all with the first task and proved that (b - a).c = 0. It took a while though, as you can imagine; is there another way to solve problems like this, or does one always have to use attributed coordinates and deal with those?

With a. and b. I'm stuck, however.
a. I usually would try to solve a question like this by taking into account the end result and what exactly I'm supposed to end up with (and often work backwards to return to the given results), but here I'm not sure at all what you end up with algebraically when three vectors meet. What am I looking for? Also I'm confused on how to find the vectors that are perpendicular to the opposite sides, how to formulate them with regard to the coordinates of A, B and C.
b. Here I immediately became confused as to what is meant by 'opposite edges'. But besides that it seems to be a fairly straightforward variation of the very first task, am I correct?
The last task seems simple as well, as I would just take the attributed coordinates and reformulate the magnitudes of the given vectors to be equivalent, perhaps with some help from the result in the first task. I haven't tackled this one yet.

Only to b)

An edge of a tetrahedron is the intersection of two triangular sides. The edge which doesn't belog to these two triangles is opposite of the intersection of the triangles.

I've attached a sketch. Edge and opposite edge are drawn in the same colour. To get an idea how such a tetrahedron could look like take a cube and cut off one vertex.

EDIT: I've attached a more detailed sketch. Maybe this helps better!
 

Attachments

  • opp_kanten4flach.jpg
    opp_kanten4flach.jpg
    8.2 KB · Views: 98
Last edited:
thanks, but I'm firstly stuck on a.!
 
furorceltica said:
Prove that, if (c - b).a = 0 and (c - a).b = 0, then (b - a).c = 0. Show that this can be used to prove the following geometric results:
a. The lines through the vertices of a triangle ABC perpendicular to the opposite sides meet in a point.
...
With a. and b. I'm stuck, however.
a. I usually would try to solve a question like this by taking into account the end result and what exactly I'm supposed to end up with (and often work backwards to return to the given results), <-- that's exactly the best way to do this question
but here I'm not sure at all what you end up with algebraically when three vectors meet. What am I looking for? Also I'm confused on how to find the vectors that are perpendicular to the opposite sides, how to formulate them with regard to the coordinates of A, B and C.
...

1. Two sides of a triangle are not parallel. The heights of these two sides of the triangle must intersect in a point H. You now have to show that the line from the vertex (that's the point of intersection of the two known sides) through H is perpendicular to the 3rd side of the triangle.

2. I'm referring to the attached sketch.

$ \overrightarrow{HA} \cdot \overrightarrow{BC} = 0~\wedge~\overrightarrow{HC} \cdot \overrightarrow{AB} = 0 $
and:
$ \overrightarrow{BC} = \overrightarrow{HC} - \overrightarrow{HB} ~\wedge~\overrightarrow{AB} = \overrightarrow{HB} - \overrightarrow{HA} $

3. Plug in:

$ \overrightarrow{HA} \cdot (\overrightarrow{HC} - \overrightarrow{HB}) = 0 $ and
$ \overrightarrow{HC} \cdot (\overrightarrow{HB} - \overrightarrow{HA}) = 0 $

Expand the brackets and add the LHS of the equations:

4.
$ \overrightarrow{HC} \cdot \overrightarrow{HB} - \overrightarrow{HA} \cdot \overrightarrow{HB} = 0 $

$ (\overrightarrow{HC} - \overrightarrow{HA}) \cdot \overrightarrow{HB} = 0 $

$ \overrightarrow{AC} \cdot \overrightarrow{HB} = 0 $

q.e.d
 

Attachments

  • höhenschnittpkt.jpg
    höhenschnittpkt.jpg
    8 KB · Views: 100
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top