Solving for Orthogonal Vectors in R4?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining values for variables in vectors in R4 such that certain vectors are orthogonal to each other. The vectors in question are v, u, and w, with specific components and conditions for orthogonality defined by their dot products being zero.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of assuming a specific value for k when solving for s and t. There is an exploration of how to set up equations based on the orthogonality conditions and the use of matrices for solving the resulting system of equations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on maintaining the assumption of k as 104/6 for subsequent calculations. There is an ongoing verification of calculated values for s and t, with suggestions to check the results against the original conditions of orthogonality.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the implications of variable dependencies and the potential for multiple solutions based on the assumptions made about k. The discussion reflects on the complexity introduced by having three variables in the equations.

concon
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given following vectors in R4:
v= (4,-9,-6,3)
u = (5,-8,k,4)
w=(s,-5,4,t)

A. Find value of k if u and v are orthogonal
B. Find values of S and T if w and u are orthogonal and w and v are orthogonal


Homework Equations



Orthogonal means dot product is zero



The Attempt at a Solution



A. I already solved and got k= 104/6 which is correct


B.
I tried to solve this one assuming that k was still equal to 104/6 and got
s=4 and t=-37/3
But this is not the answer.
Do I assume that k is still the same result as in part A or can k be anything?
If k is anything than I get:

[
4 3 -21
5 4 (-40-4k)
]
as a matrix, but how would I solve this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you should continue to use ##k=104/6## in part B. Can you show how you calculated ##s## and ##t##? You can easily check that with those values, ##w## is orthogonal to ##v## but not to ##u##.
 
jbunniii said:
I think you should continue to use ##k=104/6## in part B. Can you show how you calculated ##s## and ##t##? You can easily check that with those values, ##w## is orthogonal to ##v## but not to ##u##.
Okay that's what I thought b/c if k is unknown you have 3 variables which wouldn't be solveable.

So if k= 104/6
v*w = 4s + 45 - 24 + 3t = 0
u*w = 5s + 40 + 416/6 + 4t = 0

From there I combined like terms:

4s + 3t = -21
5s + 4t = -656/6

Then I formed a matrix and use row operations to find that:

s = 244
t = -997/3

Is this right? I think my mistake the first time using this method was when I got the 40 and 416/6 on the right hand side I added 40 instead of subtracting which changed the value.
 
Yes, that looks right. You can always substitute your answers back into your expressions for v*w and u*w to verify that you get zero in both cases.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K