Solving the Vector Triple Product Equation: Deduction

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the vector triple product equation, specifically proving that a x (b x c) + b x (c x a) + c x (a x b) = 0 and deducing that a x {b x (c x d)} + b x {c x (d x a)} + c x {d x (a x b)} + d x {a x (b x c)} = (a x c) x (b x d). Participants utilized the definition of the triple vector product and attempted substitutions to simplify the expressions. The final proof was confirmed through the correct application of vector identities and properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector algebra and operations
  • Familiarity with the vector triple product identity
  • Knowledge of vector space axioms
  • Experience with mathematical proof techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the vector triple product in detail
  • Explore vector identities and their applications in physics
  • Learn about the implications of vector spaces in linear algebra
  • Practice solving complex vector equations and proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physics students, and anyone interested in advanced vector calculus and algebraic proofs will benefit from this discussion.

cordines
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
i) Show that: a x ( b x c) + b x ( c x a) + c x (a x b ) =0
I managed to this, by expanding each term using the definition of the triple vector product i.e. a x ( b x c) = (a.c)b-(a.b)c and adding the results.

ii) and deduce that

a x { b x ( c x d ) } + b x { c x ( d x a ) } + c x { d x ( a x b) } + d x { a x ( b x c ) } =
( a x c ) x ( b x d)

I expanded each term like i did in the first an added the results an obtained:
-(d x b)(b.a) - (d.a)(c x b) - (b x a)(c.d) - (b.c)(a x d )

Clearly the result does not agree, and I can't find any means how to simplify it. Some help anyone? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi cordines! Welcome to PF! :smile:
cordines said:
I expanded each term like i did in the first …

Noooo :redface:

you've ignored the hint

it says "deduce", which means that you should use i) to do it. :wink:
 
Actually at first that's what I did by substituting a x ( b x c) = - b x ( c x a) - c x (a x b ) into d x { a x ( b x c ) } and using the triple vector definition for the other three, however it was all but in vain.

Any other suggestions on how I can substitute i) in ii) ?
 
cordines said:
Any other suggestions on how I can substitute i) in ii) ?

Yes … replace c in i) by c x d :wink:
 
As in...

To prove: a x { b x ( c x d ) } + b x { c x ( d x a ) } + c x { d x ( a x b) } + d x { a x ( b x c ) } = ( a x c ) x ( b x d)

Proof:

a x ( b x c ) = ( a . c )b - (a . b)c
a x { b x ( c x d ) } = { a . (c x d) }b - (a.b)(c x d) ... [1]

b x ( c x a ) = (b . a)c - ( b . c)a
b x { c x ( d x a ) } = (b . a)(c x d) - { b. (c x d) }a ... [2]

c x ( a x b ) = ( c . b )a - (c . a)b
c x { d x ( a x b) } = { (c x d) . b }a - { (c x d) . a }b ... [3]

Adding [1], [2] and [3] we obtain 0 which verifies with the proof in i).

For the last term,

d x { a x ( b x c ) } = d x { (a . c)b - (a . b) c }
= (a . c) ( d x b) - (a . b) (d x c)

which does not agree. I think I'm missing something. Did I expand it correctly? Thanks for your patience.
 
cordines said:
b x ( c x a ) = (b . a)c - ( b . c)a
b x { c x ( d x a ) } = (b . a)(c x d) - { b. (c x d) }a ... [2]

c x ( a x b ) = ( c . b )a - (c . a)b
c x { d x ( a x b) } = { (c x d) . b }a - { (c x d) . a }b ... [3]

Your [2] and [3] are completely wrong. :redface:

Try again. :smile:
 
b x ( c x d ) = (b . d)c - (b . c)d
a x { b x ( c x d ) } = (a x c)(b . d) - (a x d)(b .c) ...[1]

or should [1] stay as: a x { b x ( c x d ) } = { a . (c x d) }b - (a.b)(c x d)

c x ( d x a ) = (c . a)d - (c . d)a
b x { c x ( d x a ) } = (b x d)(c . a) - (b x a)(c . d) ...[2]

d x (a x b ) = (d . b)a - (d . a)b
c x { d x (a x b) } = ( c x a)(d . b) - (c x b)(d . a) ...[3]

a x ( b x c ) = (a . c)b - (a . b) c
d x { a x ( b x c ) } = (a . c) ( d x b) - (a . b) (d x c) ...[4]

Is it correct?
 
hi cordines! :smile:

(just got up :zzz: …)
cordines said:
b x ( c x d ) = (b . d)c - (b . c)d
a x { b x ( c x d ) } = (a x c)(b . d) - (a x d)(b .c) ...[1]

or should [1] stay as: a x { b x ( c x d ) } = { a . (c x d) }b - (a.b)(c x d)

yes! :rolleyes:

(and [2] [3] and [4] should look similar)

get some sleep, then try again :smile:
 
cordines said:
i) Show that: a x ( b x c) + b x ( c x a) + c x (a x b ) =0
I managed to this, by expanding each term using the definition of the triple vector product i.e. a x ( b x c) = (a.c)b-(a.b)c and adding the results.

ii) and deduce that

a x { b x ( c x d ) } + b x { c x ( d x a ) } + c x { d x ( a x b) } + d x { a x ( b x c ) } =
( a x c ) x ( b x d)

I expanded each term like i did in the first an added the results an obtained:
-(d x b)(b.a) - (d.a)(c x b) - (b x a)(c.d) - (b.c)(a x d )

Clearly the result does not agree, and I can't find any means how to simplify it. Some help anyone? Thanks

The proof you are seaching are derived from the axioms of the vector space and can be found in any of Schaums compendiums!
 
  • #10
To prove: a x { b x ( c x d ) } + b x { c x ( d x a ) } + c x { d x ( a x b) } + d x { a x ( b x c ) } = ( a x c ) x ( b x d)

Proof:

a x { b x ( c x a ) } = {a . (c x d) }b - (a.b)(c x d)

b x { c x ( d x a ) } = b x { (c.a)d - (c.d)a }
= (c.a)(b x d) - (c.d)(b x a)

c x { d x ( a x b ) } = {c . (a x b) }d - (c.d)(a x b)

d x ( a x ( b x c ) } = d x { (a . c)b - (a . b)c }
= (a . c)(d x b) - (a . b)(d x c)

Adding gives:

{a . (c x d) }b + (c . (a x b) }d = { a x c . d }b - { a x c . b }d
= ( a x c ) x ( b x d)

Proved! Thanks
 
  • #11
cordines said:
a x { b x ( c x a ) } = {a . (c x d) }b - (a.b)(c x d)

Looks good, well done! I just spotted one typo in the first line of your proof: you wrote a instead of d on the left hand side.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K