Solving Vector Manipulation Problem with $\lambda$, $\mathbf{b}$, $\mathbf{c}$

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dustinsfl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manipulation Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a vector manipulation problem involving the unknown vector $\mathbf{v}$, which satisfies the equations $\mathbf{b}\cdot\mathbf{v} = \lambda$ and $\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{v} = \mathbf{c}$. Participants explore methods to express $\mathbf{v}$ in terms of the known quantities $\lambda$, $\mathbf{b}$, and $\mathbf{c}$, considering the implications of linear independence and dimensionality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest using an orthogonal basis formed by $\{\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}\}$ to express $\mathbf{v}$ as a linear combination of these vectors.
  • Concerns are raised about whether the proposed basis spans the vector space, particularly if $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c}$ are linearly independent.
  • It is noted that the cross product is defined only in three dimensions, implying that the vector space in question is three-dimensional.
  • Participants discuss the necessity of determining whether $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c}$ are collinear, as this affects the validity of the proposed basis.
  • One participant provides an expression for $\mathbf{v}$ in terms of coefficients and suggests substituting this into the dot product equation to incorporate $\lambda$.
  • Another participant confirms that the dot products involving $\mathbf{c}$ and $\mathbf{b} \times \mathbf{c}$ are zero due to their perpendicularity, leading to a simplification of the equations.
  • There is a mention that it is possible for $\mathbf{c}$ and $\mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}$ to be null vectors, but the calculations would still hold.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the definition of collinearity in relation to the null vector.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of collinearity between the vectors $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c}$, nor on the completeness of the proposed basis. Multiple competing views remain regarding the conditions under which the basis spans the vector space.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the need to clarify the conditions under which the vectors are considered collinear and the implications of linear independence on the proposed basis. The discussion also highlights the dependence on the dimensionality of the vector space.

Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
The unknown vector $\mathbf{v}$ satisfies $\mathbf{b}\cdot\mathbf{v} = \lambda$ and $\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{v} = \mathbf{c}$, where $\lambda$, $\mathbf{b}$, and $\mathbf{c}$ are fixed and known.
Find $\mathbf{v}$ in terms of $\lambda$, $\mathbf{b}$, and $\mathbf{c}$.

I tried writing stuff out in Einstein summation notation but that didn't lead anywhere at least I didn't see it. Is there another method or approach?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi dwsmith!

Here's a suggestion.

Start with the known orthogonal basis \{\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b} \}.
Write \mathbf{v} as a linear combination of these basis vectors.
Fill in and solve.
 
ILikeSerena said:
Hi dwsmith!

Here's a suggestion.

Start with the known orthogonal basis \{\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b} \}.
Write \mathbf{v} as a linear combination of these basis vectors.
Fill in and solve.

Maybe this is obvious but how do we know that $\{\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b} \}$ spans our vector space? What if these are just lin ind but don't span? If it spans, yes v is a lin combination.
 
dwsmith said:
Maybe this is obvious but how do we know that $\{\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b} \}$ spans our vector space? What if these are just lin ind but don't span? If it spans, yes v is a lin combination.

The cross product is and can only be defined for 3 dimensions.
Since your problem contains $\mathbf{b} \times \mathbf{v}$, your vector space is 3-dimensional.
 
For this approach to work, you do need to know if $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c}$ are collinear or not. If they are collinear, then the proposed basis does not work. If they are not collinear, the proposed basis does work.
 
$$
\mathbf{v} = c_1\mathbf{b} + c_2\mathbf{c}+ c_3(\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c})
$$
So what now? How do I get lambda incorporated?
 
We have:
$\mathbf{b} \cdot \mathbf{v} = \lambda$​

Substitute your expression for $\mathbf{v}$.
$\mathbf{b} \cdot (c_1\mathbf{b} + c_2\mathbf{c}+ c_3(\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c})) = \lambda$

$c_1 \mathbf{b}^2 + c_2 \mathbf{b} \cdot \mathbf{c}+ c_3 \mathbf{b} \cdot (\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c}) = \lambda$​
Since $\mathbf{c}$ is the result of a cross product with $\mathbf{b}$ involved, they are perpendicular, so their dot product is zero.
Furthermore, $\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c}$ is perpendicular to $\mathbf{b}$, so their dot product is also zero.

So:
$c_1 b^2 = \lambda$​
$c_1 = {\lambda \over b^2}$​
It helps if you draw a picture of the vectors involved.
From the picture you should be able to see that $\mathbf{v}$ will be a linear combination of $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}$.

Btw, as Ackbach remarked, it is possible that $\mathbf{c}$ and $\mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}$ are both null vectors, but the calculations will still hold.
 
Last edited:
ILikeSerena said:
We have:
$\mathbf{b} \cdot \mathbf{v} = \lambda$​

Substitute your expression for $\mathbf{v}$.
$\mathbf{b} \cdot (c_1\mathbf{b} + c_2\mathbf{c}+ c_3(\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c})) = \lambda$

$c_1 \mathbf{b}^2 + c_2 \mathbf{b} \cdot \mathbf{c}+ c_3 \mathbf{b} \cdot (\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c})) = \lambda$​
Since $\mathbf{c}$ is the result of a cross product with $\mathbf{b}$ involved, they are perpendicular, so their dot product is zero.
Furthermore, $\mathbf{b}\times\mathbf{c}$ is perpendicular to $\mathbf{b}$, so their dot product is also zero.

So:
$c_1 b^2 = \lambda$​
$c_1 = {\lambda \over b^2}$​
It helps if you draw a picture of the vectors involved.
From the picture you should be able to see that $\mathbf{v}$ will be a linear combination of $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}$.

Btw, as Ackbach remarked, it is possible that $\mathbf{c} \times \mathbf{b}$ is the null vector, but the calculations will still hold.

I don't think b and c can be collinear since c is normal to b.
 
dwsmith said:
I don't think b and c can be collinear since c is normal to b.

What can happen is that b and v are collinear.
In that case c is the null vector.
I'm not sure if the definition of collinearity includes the null vector or not...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
675
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K