Unit Vector Confusion: Understanding Direction & Scalar Product Formula

Rudders
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have a little confusion with vectors. I have memorised the formula so I can apply it, but I don't feel I really understand how it works.

One thing that confuses me is this. How does a unit vector exactly show direction. I've memorized and can blindly believe that this is how it is, but I was wondering if someone could show how it does this, then this'll hopefully enable me to understand and apply them better.

Also, if possible. I was wondering how the scalar product formula works (I think this has to do with the unit vector, but I'm not too sure).

The formula is: a.b = |a| |b| cos (theta)

Which finds the angle between two vectors... but I'm not sure how :(

Thanks heaps!
-Rudders
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Direction.html :
"The direction from an object A to another object B can be specified as a vector v = AB with tail at A and head at B. However, since this vector has length equal to the distance between the objects in addition to encoding the direction from the first to the second, it is natural to instead consider the unit vector v (sometimes called the direction vector), which decouples the distance from the direction."

Simply put: X.Y = |X| |Y| cos θ implies (X/|X|).(Y/|Y|) = cos θ. (Each of X/|X| and Y/|Y| is a unit vector.)

This also explains how the angle θ relates to unit vectors.
 
Last edited:
Hi Rudders! :smile:
Rudders said:
… I have memorised the formula so I can apply it, but I don't feel I really understand how it works.

Which formula are you talking about? :confused:
 
I think he means \frac{\vec u}{|u|}.

A unit vector is as the name tells a vector of unit length, i.e. its length is 1. As you can see by the Pythagorean theorem, there are many right triangles with a hypotenuse of length 1, and all of these can be seen as unit vectors where the length of the two other sides represent the x and y coordinates. Try this, draw a coordinate system on a paper, draw a vector arrow in some direction starting from the origin. Observe that you can shrink the arrow in length by moving it closer of away from the origin, where each length corresponds to x and y coordinates. This process is the geometric way of multiplying the vector with a number \lambda, and if this \lambda happens to be 1/|u|, I think you will see that this is analgous to multiplying a number a by 1/a, which gives 1.
 
Every vector has "length" and "direction". Multiplying or dividing a vector by a number changes the length but not the direction.

The confusion may be that you are thinking that the unit vector \frac{\vec{u}}{|\vec{u}|} shows direction in some way that \vec{u} itself doesn't. That is not true- they both show the same direction.

We prefer to use unit vectors to "show direction" in that they do not have "distracting" other information- length.
 
Hmm. Think I understand now. Thanks :)
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top