Solve Double Cross Product Problem in $\mathbb{R}^3$

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the vector identity involving the double cross product in three-dimensional space, specifically the relationship \( u \times (v \times w) = (u \cdot w)v - (u \cdot v)w \) where \( u, v, w \in \mathbb{R}^3 \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the coplanarity of vectors resulting from the cross product and express the relationship in terms of real coefficients. Questions arise regarding the choice of signs for these coefficients and the implications of different choices. Some suggest using Cartesian components and the Levi-Civita symbol as alternative methods for expressing the cross product.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the relationships between the coefficients \( a \) and \( b \) in the expression for the cross product. Some participants have provided insights into the conditions necessary to determine these coefficients uniquely, while others are considering the implications of their choices.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that some calculations may be lengthy and question whether there are more straightforward approaches to reach the conclusion. There is also a recognition that additional conditions may be necessary to resolve ambiguities in the coefficients.

geoffrey159
Messages
535
Reaction score
68

Homework Statement


If ##u,v,w\in\mathbb{R}^3##, show that ## u\times(v\times w) = (u.w) v - (u.v) w ##.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Since ## u\times(v\times w)##, ##v## and ##w## are orthogonal to ##v\times w##, these vectors are coplanar. Therefore, there must be reals ## a,b## such that ## u\times(v\times w) = a v + b w ##.
Then, ## 0 = u.(u\times(v\times w)) = a u.v + b u.w ## and ## a = u.w## and ## b = - u.v## work. But why not ## a = -u.w ## and ## b = u.v ## ? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
geoffrey159 said:

Homework Statement


If ##u,v,w\in\mathbb{R}^3##, show that ## u\times(v\times w) = (u.w) v - (u.v) w ##.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Since ## u\times(v\times w)##, ##v## and ##w## are orthogonal to ##v\times w##, these vectors are coplanar. Therefore, there must be reals ## a,b## such that ## u\times(v\times w) = a v + b w ##.
Then, ## 0 = u.(u\times(v\times w)) = a u.v + b u.w ## and ## a = u.w## and ## b = - u.v## work. But why not ## a = -u.w ## and ## b = u.v ## ? Thanks
Write the vectors in Cartesian components and expand the double product.
 
geoffrey159 said:

Homework Statement


If ##u,v,w\in\mathbb{R}^3##, show that ## u\times(v\times w) = (u.w) v - (u.v) w ##.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Since ## u\times(v\times w)##, ##v## and ##w## are orthogonal to ##v\times w##, these vectors are coplanar. Therefore, there must be reals ## a,b## such that ## u\times(v\times w) = a v + b w ##.
Then, ## 0 = u.(u\times(v\times w)) = a u.v + b u.w ## and ## a = u.w## and ## b = - u.v## work. But why not ## a = -u.w ## and ## b = u.v ## ? Thanks

An alternative method is to write vectors as ##/vec{v} = (v_1,v_2,v_3)## for example, and use the so-called Levi-Civita symbol to express the cross-product:
(\vec{u} \times \vec{v}) _i = \sum_{j,k} \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k
Here the Levi-Civita symbol ##\epsilon## is
\epsilon_{ijk} = \begin{cases} +1 &amp; \text{if} \:\; ijk \; \text{is an even permutation of} \: \; 123 \\<br /> -1 &amp; \text{if} \:\; ijk \; \text{is an odd permutation of} \:\; 123 \\<br /> 0 &amp; \text{otherwise} .<br /> \end{cases} <br />
There are identities available for sums of products like ##\sum_k \epsilon_{ijk} \epsilon_{klm}## which would be the thing needed in the triple product. See, eg., http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucappgu/seminars/levi-civita.pdf or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol .
 
Thank you for your answers, but is it possible to avoid lengthy calculations ?
In the OP, I am to the point where ## (a,b) \in \{\pm (u.w, - u.v) \} ##.
How should I decide for the sign ?
 
geoffrey159 said:
Thank you for your answers, but is it possible to avoid lengthy calculations ?
In the OP, I am to the point where ## (a,b) \in \{\pm (u.w, - u.v) \} ##.
How should I decide for the sign ?

Some detailed calculations are just unavoidable. However, if you pay attention to what I said in #3, that will lead to just about the shortest and most straightforward proof available. Besides, you have NOT reached the point where ## (a,b) \in \{\pm (u.w, - u.v) \} ##, because you had one relation between ##a## and ##b##, and you said that your particular choice "works". However, in principle, there are infinitely many other choices of ##a,b## that also work for that single condition. Somehow, you need more conditions in order to pin down ##a,b## convincingly and uniquely.
 
Last edited:
Oops you're right, I'm just at ## \begin{pmatrix}a\\b\end{pmatrix} \in \mathbb{R} \begin{pmatrix}u.w \\ -u.v \end{pmatrix} ##.
Thanks again, I will try your proof.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K