Vector multiplication question

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Nabeshin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multiplication Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a vector multiplication question related to the vector triple product in the context of astrodynamics. Participants explore the derivation of a specific vector identity involving position and velocity vectors, aiming to clarify its mathematical and physical significance.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a vector identity from astrodynamics and seeks clarification on its derivation.
  • Another participant suggests using the vector triple product formula (Lagrange's formula) to derive the identity, indicating that it can be proved by substituting specific vectors.
  • A third participant expresses gratitude for the information but indicates a lack of familiarity with the formula mentioned.
  • A different participant critiques the initial response, arguing that it does not directly address the question and suggests a more intuitive understanding of the relationship between the vectors involved.
  • This participant notes that the result of the vector cross product must be perpendicular to certain vectors, leading to a linear combination that includes a projection term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the clarity of the explanation provided. While some find the vector triple product useful, others feel it does not adequately address the original question, indicating a lack of agreement on the sufficiency of the responses.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes varying levels of familiarity with vector identities and the implications of vector operations, which may affect participants' understanding and interpretations of the responses.

Nabeshin
Science Advisor
Messages
2,207
Reaction score
16
I'm not sure where to put this question, since it deals with both physics and math, so I figured here would be a good starting point.

In the book of astrodynamics I'm currently reading, I came across this expansion:

[tex](\vec{r}\times\vec{v})\times\vec{r}=[\vec{v}(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{r})-\vec{r}(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{v})][/tex]

Can anyone explain how this result is arrived at? If any physical significance is needed, r is a position vector and v its derivative with respect to time, the velocity vector.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, the standard way is just to use the vector triple product (Lagranges formula, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_product#Vector_triple_product"):

[tex]\vec{a}\times (\vec{b}\times \vec{c})= \vec{b}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{c}) - \vec c (\vec a\cdot \vec b)[/tex]
(also know as the BAC CAB rule)

This relation can easily be proved, by calculating both sides (just insert [tex]\vec {a} = (a_1,a_2,a_3)[/tex] and so on).

In your case we have, [tex]\vec a = \vec c \equiv \vec r[/tex] and [tex]\vec b \equiv \dot{\vec r} = \vec v[/tex].
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah, thank you very much :) Simply a formula I was not familiar with.
 
? The "triple product" is just the same as the product asked about so I don't see how that answers your question, except to say "yes, it is a well known calculation". Of course, the way to see that it is true is to use some general <a, b, c>, <x, y, z> for [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{v}[/itex].

For a little more "intuitive" insight, we know that [itex]\vec{r}\times\vec{v}[/itex] is perpendicular to both [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{v}[/itex] so the result of any vector cross [itex]\vec{r}\times\vec{v}[/itex] must be perpendicular to that vector and so in the plane spanned by [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{v}[/itex] and can be written as a linear combination of them: [itex]a\vec{r}+ b\vec{v}[/itex]. But [itex](\vec{r}\times\vec{v})\times \vec{r}[/itex] must also be perpendicular to [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] so we must subtract off any projection onto [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]. That is the "[itex]\vec{r}(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{v}[/itex]" part.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K