MHB T31 vector subtraction is not commutative and not associative.

karush
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,240
Reaction score
5
Prove, by giving counterexamples, that vector subtraction is not commutative
and not associative.

ok I read all I could on trying to understand this but seem to not see something simple
if we have the example of

$u=\begin{bmatrix}2\\-3\\4\\2\end{bmatrix} v=\begin{bmatrix}-1\\5\\2\\-7\end{bmatrix}
u+v=\begin{bmatrix}2\\-3\\4\\2\end{bmatrix}+\begin{bmatrix}-1\\5\\2\\-7\end{bmatrix}
=\begin{bmatrix}2+(-1)\\-3+5\\4+2\\2+(-7)\end{bmatrix}
=\begin{bmatrix}1\\2\\6\\-5\end{bmatrix}$

if we replace the + with - does that mean it is not commutative and not associative.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If vector subtraction would be commutative, we would have $u-v=v-u$.
Suppose we substitute your $u$ and $v$ into it, does the equality hold then?

If vector subtraction would be associative, we would have $u-(v-w)=(u-v)-w$.
So we need example vectors $u,v,w$ such that those are not equal.
 
ok, that makes sense
 
I don't understand why you added vectors. Why didn't you try subtracting as you were asked to?
Commutative:
$\begin{bmatrix}2\\ -3 \\ 4 \\2 \end{bmatrix}- \begin{bmatrix} -1\\ 5 \\ 2 \\-7\end{bmatrix}= ?$

$\begin{bmatrix} -1\\ 5 \\ 2 \\-7\end{bmatrix}- \begin{bmatrix}2\\ -3 \\ 4 \\2 \end{bmatrix} = ?$

Are they the same?

Associative:
$\left(\begin{bmatrix}2\\ -3 \\ 4 \\2 \end{bmatrix}- \begin{bmatrix} -1\\ 5 \\ 2 \\-7\end{bmatrix}\right)$$- \begin{bmatrix}5\\ -3 \\ 7 \\1 \end{bmatrix}= ?$

$\begin{bmatrix}2\\ -3 \\ 4 \\2 \end{bmatrix}- \left( \begin{bmatrix} -1\\ 5 \\ 2 \\-7\end{bmatrix}- \begin{bmatrix}5\\ -3 \\ 7 \\1 \end{bmatrix}\right)= ?$

Are they the same?
 
so if we have a negative scaler like - 2 we write it as $+(-2)$
 
karush said:
so if we have a negative scaler like - 2 we write it as $+(-2)$
Honestly any way you write it it is still non-commutative, though it does help to remind you that you are subtracting and not adding because vector addition is commutative.

I realize that the problem is simply making a point about vector arithmetic, but the whole issue is that subtraction is not commutative over complex numbers. [math]a_{ij} - b_{ij} \neq b_{ij} - a_{ij}[/math] for any complex numbers.

-Dan
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K