Vector question to think about

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nick227
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the geometric significance of the scalar triple product of vectors X, Y, and Z, specifically when the product X*(YxZ) equals zero. Participants explore the implications of this condition in the context of geometry, vector relationships, and the properties of parallelepipeds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that if X, Y, and Z are orthonormal, the expression X*(YxZ) relates to the volume of a parallelepiped formed by these vectors.
  • Others explain that the length of Y x Z represents the area of a parallelogram defined by Y and Z.
  • A participant questions the geometric significance of the scalar triple product being zero, suggesting it indicates that the vectors may lie in the same plane.
  • Some participants discuss the conditions under which the volume of the parallelepiped is zero, including the possibility of the vectors being distinct nonzero vectors.
  • There is a correction regarding the definitions of the dot and cross products, emphasizing the distinction between vector magnitudes and their geometric interpretations.
  • One participant raises the question of whether the zero volume implies that the parallelepiped could be a cube, prompting further exploration of the implications of the vectors' relationships.
  • Another participant suggests that if the volume is zero, the vectors must be coplanar, leading to a discussion about the nature of the vectors involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the implications of the scalar triple product being zero, with some agreeing on the coplanarity of the vectors while others explore different scenarios and conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications of the relationships between the vectors.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the vectors, particularly regarding their lengths and orthogonality, which affect the interpretations of the geometric significance of the scalar triple product.

nick227
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
my teacher told me to think about this and i don't seem to get it. given vectors X,Y,& Z; is there geometric significance when X*(YxZ)=0

* is dot product and x is cross product
 
Physics news on Phys.org
geometry

Say X, Y and Z are orthonormal. Consider the part of X in the plane determined by the vectors Y and Z.
 
The length of Y x Z is the area of a parallelogram with adjacent sides given by Y and Z.

X*(YxZ) is the the volume of a parallopiped having sides, at one vertex, given by X, Y, and Z. You can see that by using the formulas [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and length of [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex].
 
HallsofIvy said:
The length of Y x Z is the area of a parallelogram with adjacent sides given by Y and Z.

X*(YxZ) is the the volume of a parallopiped having sides, at one vertex, given by X, Y, and Z. You can see that by using the formulas [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and length of [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex].

:mad: you shouldn't have just given him the answer
 
While HallsofIvy gave the interpretation when that special product is generally nonzero, there's still some interpretation left to do [for the OP] for the zero case.
 
Last edited:
HallsofIvy said:
The length of Y x Z is the area of a parallelogram with adjacent sides given by Y and Z.

X*(YxZ) is the the volume of a parallopiped having sides, at one vertex, given by X, Y, and Z. You can see that by using the formulas [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and length of [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex].


isn't [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex]?

also, from that definition, would the angle between Y and Z equal to 0? when i break the given down, i get:
|X||Y|cos(theta) x |X||Z|cos(theta).
i can't really see the geometric significance.
 
Combinations of cross products and dot products like that are known as triple products.
 
wait so then if this triple product equals to 0, then does that mean the parallopiped is a cube?
 
nick227 said:
isn't [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex]?

You are (mostly) correct.
It is [itex]| \vec X \times \vec Y | = |\vec X| |\vec Y| |\sin\theta|[/itex] and [itex]\vec X \cdot \vec Y = |\vec X| |\vec Y| \cos\theta[/itex], where [itex]\theta[/tex] is the angle between the vectors. ([itex]\vec X \times \vec Y[/itex] is a vector with magnitude [itex]|\vec X| |\vec Y| |\sin\theta|[/itex] with direction perpendicular to the plane determined by [itex]\vec X[/itex] and [itex]\vec Y[/itex], according to the right-hand-rule.)<br /> (I suspect HallsofIvy's typo was due to a confusion over the symbols " * " and its synonym " X " for multiplication.)<br /> <br /> HallsofIvy gave the interpretation of the (scalar-)triple-product as the volume of a parallelopiped (a generally-slanted box with parallel sides) formed with those vectors. How would you describe this box if its volume were zero? What does that tell you about the relationship between [itex]\vec X[/itex], [itex]\vec Y[/itex] and [itex]\vec Z[/itex], along the lines of cornfall's suggestion?[/itex]
 
  • #10
robphy said:
You are (mostly) correct.
It is [itex]| \vec X \times \vec Y | = |\vec X| |\vec Y| |\sin\theta|[/itex] and [itex]\vec X \cdot \vec Y = |\vec X| |\vec Y| \cos\theta[/itex], where [itex]\theta[/tex] is the angle between the vectors. ([itex]\vec X \times \vec Y[/itex] is a vector with magnitude [itex]|\vec X| |\vec Y| |\sin\theta|[/itex] with direction perpendicular to the plane determined by [itex]\vec X[/itex] and [itex]\vec Y[/itex], according to the right-hand-rule.)<br /> (I suspect HallsofIvy's typo was due to a confusion over the symbols " * " and its synonym " X " for multiplication.)<br /> <br /> HallsofIvy gave the interpretation of the (scalar-)triple-product as the volume of a parallelopiped (a generally-slanted box with parallel sides) formed with those vectors. How would you describe this box if its volume were zero? What does that tell you about the relationship between [itex]\vec X[/itex], [itex]\vec Y[/itex] and [itex]\vec Z[/itex], along the lines of cornfall's suggestion?[/itex]
[itex] <br /> if X,Y, & Z are orthonormal, than is X = (YxZ)? also, if the volume of the box is zero, then its not a 3d figure, its 2d. in that case, its a square.[/itex]
 
  • #11
nick227 said:
if the volume of the box is zero, then its not a 3d figure, its 2d. in that case, its a square.

So, what does that mean for vectors X, Y, and Z?
 
  • #12
robphy said:
So, what does that mean for vectors X, Y, and Z?

is it that all three vectors are on the same plane?
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Ok that's one way that the triple product is zero.
But suppose that X, Y, and Z are distinct nonzero vectors.
In fact, take a special case when X, Y, and Z are all vectors of length 1.
( When X,Y,Z are mutually orthogonal, you have a cube... with volume 1. )

Can you form a different parallelepiped with distinct nonzero vectors (with length 1) with a volume that is almost zero?... from there nudge things so that the volume is zero. What can you say about the vectors X,Y, and Z in that case? Now generalize to the general case.
 
  • #14
nick227 said:
is it that all three vectors are on the same plane?

ah... you changed your answer on me.

That's correct.
 
  • #15
robphy said:
ah... you changed your answer on me.

That's correct.

well i spent a lot of time thinking about it, and it finally clicked. Thanks for all the help!
 
  • #16
HallsofIvy said:
The length of Y x Z is the area of a parallelogram with adjacent sides given by Y and Z.

X*(YxZ) is the the volume of a parallopiped having sides, at one vertex, given by X, Y, and Z. You can see that by using the formulas [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and length of [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex].

nick227 said:
isn't [itex]X x Y= |X||Y|sin(\theta)[/itex] and [itex]X*Y= |X||Y|cos(\theta)[/itex]?
Yes to the last- that's exactly what I said. No to the first. X x Y is a vector, not a number and what you give is its length.

also, from that definition, would the angle between Y and Z equal to 0? when i break the given down, i get:
|X||Y|cos(theta) x |X||Z|cos(theta).
i can't really see the geometric significance.
What you wrote makes no sense- you cannot take the the cross product of two numbers!
What does X*(YxZ)= 0 tell you about X and YxZ? What does that tell you, then, about X and both Y and Z?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K