Quaternions - Meaning and multiplication

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties and definitions of quaternions, particularly focusing on the multiplication rules of their imaginary components and the rationale behind using imaginary numbers in their formulation. Participants explore theoretical aspects, historical context, and personal understanding of quaternions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the multiplication rules of quaternions, particularly why certain products of imaginary units yield negative results or other imaginary units.
  • The same participant questions the necessity of imaginary numbers in the context of quaternions, seeking to understand their unique role compared to traditional 3-vectors.
  • Another participant suggests that multiplication can be defined in various ways to create an algebra, noting that the definition used for quaternions is beneficial due to its associative property and the existence of inverses for nonzero elements.
  • A further reply indicates that the definition of multiplication in quaternions might seem arbitrary but has historical significance, referencing the Frobenius theorem related to real division algebras.
  • One participant shares insights gained from reading a historical letter by Hamilton, which provides context for the development of quaternion rules and their significance in mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the underlying reasons for the multiplication rules of quaternions or the necessity of imaginary numbers, indicating that multiple views and uncertainties remain in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference historical documents and theories, which may contain assumptions or definitions that are not fully explored in the current discussion. There is also a mention of the complexity of the mathematical concepts involved, which may limit understanding.

david.aloha
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
All right, I've been doing a lot of reading on quaternions, and while I think I understand how to use them, I'm still very confused as to why certain things are defined the way that they are. First question:
Why, when multiplying the imaginary portions of quaternions do you get these "rules":
i*i = j*j = k*k = -1
i*j = k, j*i = -k
j*k = i, k*j = -i
k*i = j, i*k = -j

I understand why i*i = -1, but why does an imaginary number times an imaginary number sometimes equal the negative of another imaginary number? I can't seem to find any underlying reason for this in anything I've read - it's just stated.

Second question:
Why use imaginary numbers at all if you're just defining a 3-vector plus a scalar (at least in terms of its use for 3D rotation which is the main context I've viewed it in)? What is complex or imaginary about it? The imaginary parts each define an axis in the same way as x, y, and z in a 3-vector - I'm just struggling to find what's different or special about adding the imaginary numbers (which, as I said above, also confuse me by only sometimes acting like imaginary numbers in multiplication).

I've spent a few days now looking through many different guides to quaternions, and none of them seem to answer these questions. Any help or clarification would be greatly appreciated. I'm the kind of guy who needs to know WHY something works, not just HOW it works, and this lack of why is driving me nuts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We can define multiplication pretty much however we want to get an algebra. That particular definition is nice, because multiplication is associative and every nonzero element has an inverse.

My limited knowledge of history is that quaternions inspired the invention of the dot and cross products.
 
Hurkyl said:
We can define multiplication pretty much however we want to get an algebra. That particular definition is nice, because multiplication is associative and every nonzero element has an inverse.
Which possibly makes it sound more arbitrary than it might otherwise be regarded - see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frobenius_theorem_(real_division_algebras).
 
While large parts of the link you gave were a bit beyond me, I think I understand the significance behind why Quaternions are they way they are as a sort of base for "associative division algebras" (along with real numbers and complex numbers). I was reading this letter from Hamilton on how he arrived at Quaternions and I'm seeing a little better the process behind how he came to those rules:
http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Hamilton/QLetter/QLetter.pdf

I haven't read the entire letter yet (takes a long time when I'm really trying to formulate all of what he's saying) but I think I have a better understanding now than I did previously. Thanks for the responses.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K