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

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 4K views
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:
[tex](\vec{u} \times \vec{v}) _i = \sum_{j,k} \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k[/tex]
Here the Levi-Civita symbol ##\epsilon## is
[tex]\epsilon_{ijk} = \begin{cases} +1 & \text{if} \:\; ijk \; \text{is an even permutation of} \: \; 123 \\<br /> -1 & \text{if} \:\; ijk \; \text{is an odd permutation of} \:\; 123 \\<br /> 0 & \text{otherwise} .<br /> \end{cases} [/tex]
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.