Proving Vector Cross Product Properties in ℝ3?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving properties of the vector cross product in three-dimensional space (ℝ3), specifically the relationships between the standard basis vectors e1, e2, and e3.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to prove the relationships e1 x e2 = e3, e2 x e3 = e1, and e3 x e1 = e2 using the definition of the cross product. Some express confusion regarding their calculations and whether they are applying the properties correctly.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions and properties of the cross product. Some participants suggest that the question may refer specifically to the standard basis vectors, indicating a potential misunderstanding of the general applicability of the properties discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the relationships may not hold for arbitrary vectors, suggesting that the question may be limited to specific cases involving the standard basis vectors in ℝ3.

Jow
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
If e1 and e2 are vectors in ℝ3 show that e1 x e2 = e3, e2 x e3 = e1 and e3 x e1 = e2. I have tried to prove this but I can't get it.

My attempt:
Step 1: [a1, a2, a3] x [b1, b2, b3] = [a2b3-a3b2, a3b1-a1b3, a1b2-a2b1]
Step 2: [b1, b2, b3] x [a2b3-b2a3, a3b1-a1b3, a1b2-a2b1] = [b2(a1b2-a2b1)-b3(a3b1-a1b3), b3(a2b3-a3b2)-b1(a1b2-a2b1), b1(a3b1-a1b3)-b2(a2b3-b2a3)] ... nothing cancels and I do not end up with [a1, a2, a3], which I should shouldn't I?
I also try this with actual numbers but it still doesn't work. Am I doing something completely wrong? I understand, geometrically, why this should happen because the cross product is orthogonal to the two vectors. Am I doing something wrong or is my textbook wrong? (I am pretty sure the former is the right answer to that question).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jow said:
If e1 and e2 are vectors in ℝ3 show that e1 x e2 = e3, e2 x e3 = e1 and e3 x e1 = e2. I have tried to prove this but I can't get it.

My attempt:
Step 1: [a1, a2, a3] x [b1, b2, b3] = [a2b3-a3b2, a3b1-a1b3, a1b2-a2b1]
Step 2: [b1, b2, b3] x [a2b3-b2a3, a3b1-a1b3, a1b2-a2b1] = [b2(a1b2-a2b1)-b3(a3b1-a1b3), b3(a2b3-a3b2)-b1(a1b2-a2b1), b1(a3b1-a1b3)-b2(a2b3-b2a3)] ... nothing cancels and I do not end up with [a1, a2, a3], which I should shouldn't I?
I also try this with actual numbers but it still doesn't work. Am I doing something completely wrong? I understand, geometrically, why this should happen because the cross product is orthogonal to the two vectors. Am I doing something wrong or is my textbook wrong? (I am pretty sure the former is the right answer to that question).

I think they mean e1=[1,0,0], e2=[0,1,0] and e3=[0,0,1]. They are special vectors. It's not true for any three vectors.
 
Oh good. I thought I was missing something really important. I must have just misread the question. Thanks.
 
In fact, one way of defining the "cross product" is to assert that e_1\times e_2= e_3, e_2\times e_3= e_1, e_3\times e_1= e_2, that the product is "bilinear" and anti-commutative.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
34K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K