What happens when the denominator is 0 in a 3d line equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Krushnaraj Pandya
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    3d Line
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of having a denominator of zero in the context of a 3D line equation, particularly for lines parallel to the z-axis. Participants are exploring how to represent such lines mathematically and the visualization challenges that arise from this representation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants attempt to understand the visualization of lines parallel to the z-axis and question how to express points on such lines when the equations involve division by zero. Others discuss the interpretation of symmetric-form equations and the implications of having zero components in the direction vector.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing differing views on the appropriateness of the notation used in the equations. Some express confusion over the visualization and representation of lines in 3D space, while others provide insights into alternative representations and the nature of the equations involved.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted tension between conventional mathematical notation and its interpretation, particularly regarding the use of zero in denominators. Participants are also grappling with the implications of this notation for understanding the geometry of lines in three-dimensional space.

Krushnaraj Pandya
Gold Member
Messages
697
Reaction score
73

Homework Statement


I noticed that for a line parallel to z axis the equation is (x-a)/0 = (y-b)/0 = (z-c)/k = t.

Homework Equations


Any 3d geometry equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I can't quite grasp how to visualize this, also I can't see any constant like a 2d line parallel to x-axis would have y=constant. Another problem is how to take a general point on this line with parameter t, do we just say x=a, y=b or ignore the zero...intuitively it seems for a given point x and y have to be a and b to be able to have the line parallel to z. Any good ways to visualize all this?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Krushnaraj Pandya said:

Homework Statement


I noticed that for a line parallel to z axis the equation is (x-a)/0 = (y-b)/0 = (z-c)/k = t.

Homework Equations


Any 3d geometry equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I can't quite grasp how to visualize this, also I can't see any constant like a 2d line parallel to x-axis would have y=constant. Another problem is how to take a general point on this line with parameter t, do we just say x=a, y=b or ignore the zero...intuitively it seems for a given point x and y have to be a and b to be able to have the line parallel to z. Any good ways to visualize all this?
First of all: a denominator ##0## is nonsense. Just nonsense. Your equation for a line in ##\mathbb{R}^3## is probably: ##\begin{bmatrix}x\\y\\z\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}m_x\\m_y\\m_z\end{bmatrix}\cdot t + \begin{bmatrix}x_0\\y_0\\z_0\end{bmatrix}## and there is nowhere a division by zero, although any constant there is allowed to be zero as e.g. ##m_x=m_y=0## for a line parallel to the ##z-##axis.

You can draw those lines and planes in a coordinate system like
upload_2018-11-8_3-24-3-png.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-11-8_3-24-3-png.png
    upload_2018-11-8_3-24-3-png.png
    397 bytes · Views: 786
It is common to describe a line in \mathbb{R}^3 for which the tangent vector has no zero component by taking the components of the vector equation and setting the three resulting expressions for t equal to each other: \frac{x - x_0}{m_x} = \frac{y - y_0}{m_y} = \frac{z - z_0}{m_z}. But if any of m_x, m_y and m_z are zero then you can't do that, and you have to write separate equations. For example, if m_x = 0 you must write <br /> x = x_0,\qquad\frac{y - y_0}{m_y} = \frac{z - z_0}{m_z}. If m_x = m_y = 0 then you must write x = x_0,\qquad y = y_0.If m_x = m_y = m_z = 0 then you have a single point, not a line.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS and PeroK
Krushnaraj Pandya said:
I noticed that for a line parallel to z axis the equation is (x-a)/0 = (y-b)/0 = (z-c)/k = t.

fresh_42 said:
First of all: a denominator 0 is nonsense. Just nonsense.
I beg to differ. The equations above are the symmetric-form equations of a line in ##\mathbb R^3##. The denominators here should be considered to be notation, but not taken literally to mean division by zero.

From a note in "Calculus and Analytic Geometry, Second Ed.," by Abraham Schwartz, p. 590 (italics added):
Remark 2
If one of the components of ##\vec v## is 0, then one of the members of the symmetric-form equations for a line L in ##\vec v's## direction will have 0 as its denominator. In such a case, the symmetric-form description of L is to be interpreted as a statement about proportional trios of numbers.
Krushnaraj Pandya said:
I can't quite grasp how to visualize this, also I can't see any constant like a 2d line parallel to x-axis would have y=constant. Another problem is how to take a general point on this line with parameter t, do we just say x=a, y=b or ignore the zero...intuitively it seems for a given point x and y have to be a and b to be able to have the line parallel to z. Any good ways to visualize all this?
In your equations, a vector ##\vec v## in the direction of the line is <0, 0, k>; that is, it is a vector parallel to the z-axis.
 
Last edited:
Mark44 said:
I beg to differ. The equations above are the symmetric-form equations of a line in ##\mathbb R^3##. The denominators here should be considered to be notation, but not taken literally to mean division by zero.
Quite an unfortunate way to express it, there are better representations.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS
fresh_42 said:
Quite an unfortunate way to express it, there are better representations.
That may be, but the symmetric-form equations are a compact way to incorporate a point on the line and its direction.
 
fresh_42 said:
Quite an unfortunate way to express it, there are better representations.
I agree, except that the word "unfortunate" is much too mild.
 

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K