How to prove that if x is orthogonal to u and v, then x is orthogonal to u - v

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dustinsfl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orthogonal Vectors
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
14 replies · 3K views
Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
If x is ⊥ u and v, then x is ⊥ u - v.

I know this is true because u - v is in the same place as u and v; therefore, x is orthogonal. How can this be written better?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the property of the dot product that a dot (b+c) = a dot b + a dot c
 
Dustinsfl said:
If x is ⊥ u and v, then x is ⊥ u - v.

I know this is true because u - v is in the same place as u and v; therefore, x is orthogonal. How can this be written better?

"is in the same plane as u and v..."

Dot product?
 
I understand the dot product needs to be used to do this (VeeEight and Mark) but I don't know how to implement it correctly.
 
If two vectors are orthogonal, what is their dot product?
 
I got it <x,v>=0, <x,u>=0

<x,u-v>=<x,u>-<x,v>=0-0=0
 
If x ⊥ u, how can you say the same thing using the dot product. You don't have to "implement" anything - just use the dot product.
 
Dustinsfl said:
I got it <x,v>=0, <x,u>=0

<x,u-v>=<x,u>-<x,v>=0-0=0
OK, then what does this say about x and u - v?
 
Dustinsfl said:
I got it <x,v>=0, <x,u>=0

<x,u-v>=<x,u>-<x,v>=0-0=0

:smile:
 
VeeEight said:
Use the property of the dot product that a dot (b+c) = a dot b + a dot c

VeeEight said:
:smile:

I was thinking more of proof then doing.
 
Dustinsfl said:
I was thinking more of proof then doing.

:confused:
 
I was thinking of a formal proof then just doing <x..> ... =0
 
Dustinsfl said:
I was thinking of a formal proof then just doing <x..> ... =0
That is a formal proof. Don't overthink this stuff at the expense of understanding what's going on.
 
Use the linearity of the dot product ( , ) so,

(x,u)=(u,x)=0 and (x,v)=(v,x)=0,
So consider,
(u-v,x)=(u,x)-(v,x)=0 => (x,u-v)=0.