Understanding Line in R^3 Parallel to XY-Plane: Help Needed

kerrwilk
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
What does it mean if a line in R^3 is parallel to the xy-plane but not to any of the axes. I really don't know what this means in terms of how the parametric and symmetric equations of the line should look. Please help. Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
A line in R^3 can be described by a parametric equation of the form

\textbf{r}(t) = \textbf{r}_0+t\textbf{v},

where \textbf{r}_0 is the position vector representing a point in \mathbb{R}^3, t is a real number, and \textbf{v} is a non-zero displacement vector indicating the direction of the line (and also its orientation: which way along the line is positive).

The condition for this line to be parallel to the xy-plane is that the z-component of \textbf{v} is zero. That is, \textbf{v} must be of the form (v1,v2,0), where v1 and v2 are fixed real numbers, not both 0. Suppose this is the case. If, and only if, v1 is 0, the line will be parallel to the y-axis. If, and only if, v2 is 0, the line will be parallel to the x-axis.
 
Thanks! That was a great explanation.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top