I've always wondered this about vectors. As far as I understand if we could make it intelligible it would be ideal to visualize each infinitely small point as vectors in a field.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Since we cannot we space them out so visually so it's not an unrecognizable mess. Which is one reason that lead to my confusion about lines of flux having geometric shape etc.

It seems like since vectors are represented with arrows that have length, width and sometimes depth, they tend to cover an infinite amount of other very small points that could be also represented by vectors and give a more accurate field depiction.

This is less of an issue when dealing with a simple field where you probably can predict much of the surrounding field structure the same way you can predict the structure of a sphere if you know the how far out from the point of origin you are. But when you get into complex systems of fields, would it help to have much more accurate depictions? Even if not, it seems ideal to represent vectors with dots anyway, if it were a possiblity.

Too bad human brains cannot distinguish trilions upon trillions of colors then a single very, very small colored point would suffice to indicate a magnitude and direction such that we don't have arrows that cover other potential vector points. And like the evolution of HDTV from old television technology, vector depiction would make astounding leaps forward in visualization.

Other than, "Dude, quit wasting precious forum space with this insipid crap!"...does anyone have any thoughts on this?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Too bad we can't represent vectors with dots?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**