Which Vector Notation is Best for Physics, Engineering, and Mathematics?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the preferred vector notation among physicists, engineers, and mathematicians, highlighting the use of column matrices in linear algebra versus the component notation (xi + yj + zk) in other contexts. Participants note that while the column matrix is ideal for matrix operations, the component notation is often quicker and simpler for calculations, especially when dealing with cross-products. The conversation also touches on the importance of coordinate systems in vector and tensor equations, emphasizing that these equations remain invariant regardless of the chosen system. Additionally, Einstein notation and coordinate-free notation are mentioned as advanced methods that can simplify complex vector manipulations. Ultimately, the choice of notation depends on the specific application and the user's familiarity with the different systems.
thegreenlaser
Messages
524
Reaction score
16
I'm curious, which vector notation is preferred by physicists/engineers/mathematicians? In linear algebra we used matrix notation exclusively, putting the x,y,z,... components down a column matrix. (no idea how to put this in latex). In all my other courses though, we've been using (xi +yj +zk) notation where x,y,z are the components of the vector and i,j,k are unit vectors on the x, y, and z axes respectively.

Which notation do you prefer for which situations and why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I am writing quickly, just <x, y, z> will do. Typically, I would use the "column matrix" form only if I were working with matrices.

By the way, you can do matrices in LaTex with \begin{bmatrix}... \end{bmatrix} for "square brackets" or \begin{pmatrix} ... \end{pmatrix} for "parentheses". Use & to separate items on a single line and \\ to separate lines a single column matrix would be
\begin{bmatrix} x \\ y \\ z\end{bmatrix}:
\begin{bmatrix} x \\ y \\ z\end{bmatrix}.

You can see the code for that, or any LaTex, by double clicking on the expression.
 
hi thegreenlaser! :wink:

xi +yj +zk is often easier to write,

and it's a lot easier to make cross-products with! :smile:
 
It definitely depends on the application. The thing about vectors and tensors in physics is that they don't depend on the coordinate system you use to describe them. You can use coordinate free notation, like C=A+B, but it can get messy, its much easier sometimes to use the "language" of a coordinate system to talk about vectors, like C1=A1+B1, C2=A2+B2, etc. But then sometimes you have to deal with the fact that the vector and tensor equations using these coordinate systems are independent of those coordinate systems. This can get messy too, but Einstein developed a way of describing vectors using coordinate systems along with a bunch of rules about how to manipulate them which automatically shows you the invariance of the equations. Check out "Einstein notation" and "Coordinate free notation" on Wikipedia. It takes some work to get the hang of it, but once you do, its a very valuable tool in your vector/tensor toolkit.
 
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
753
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K