Why Do Different Methods Give Different Answers to j \cdot {-j}?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mbrmbrg
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the dot product of the vector j and its negative counterpart -j. Participants explore different methods of calculating this product and the resulting discrepancies in their answers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants describe using the formula for the dot product involving magnitudes and angles, while others apply the component-wise definition of the dot product. There are questions about the implications of negative signs in vector calculations and the interpretation of magnitudes.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning the assumptions behind their calculations, and exploring the properties of the dot product. Some guidance has been offered regarding the interpretation of magnitudes and the treatment of negative vectors, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There are references to potential misunderstandings regarding the absolute value of vectors and the implications of direction in vector calculations. The discussion also touches on the definitions and properties of unit vectors.

mbrmbrg
Messages
486
Reaction score
2
Nice, simple, straighforward problem:
[itex]j \cdot {-j}[/itex]

Difficulty: I solved it two ways and got two answers.

[itex]\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b}=ab\cos\phi[/itex]

So in this case, I should get [tex]j \cdot {-j}=(1)(-1)(cos(180^o))=(1)(-1)(-1)=1[/itex]<br /> <br /> However, using the formula [itex]\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b}=a_{x}b_{x}+a_{y}b_{y}+a_{z}b_{z}[/itex], I got [itex]j \cdot {-j}=a_{y}b_{y}=(1)(-1)=-1[/itex]<br /> <br /> Can anyone tell me why?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
mbrmbrg said:
Nice, simple, straighforward problem:
[itex]j \cdot {-j}[/itex]

Difficulty: I solved it two ways and got two answers.

[itex]\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b}=ab\cos\phi[/itex]

So in this case, I should get [tex]j \cdot {-j}=(1)(-1)(cos(180^o))=(1)(-1)(-1)=1[/itex]<br /> <br /> However, using the formula [itex]\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b}=a_{x}b_{x}+a_{y}b_{y}+a_{z}b_{z}[/itex], I got [itex]j \cdot {-j}=a_{y}b_{y}=(1)(-1)=-1[/itex]<br /> <br /> Can anyone tell me why?[/tex]
[tex] <br /> Recall that the dot product is:<br /> [tex]\vec A \cdot \vec B = |\vec A| |\vec B| \cos \theta_{AB}[/tex]<br /> <br /> let [itex]\vec A = (0,-1,0)[/itex]<br /> [tex]A=|\vec A| = \sqrt{(0)^2 +(-1)^2 +(0)^2}[/tex]<br /> <br /> What is [itex](-1)^2[/itex] :)[/tex]
 
Neither my book nor my professor mentions the absolute value thing. I guess that's completely implied, though, because the negative sign has to do with direction, not magnitude.

Thank you so much!
 
[tex]|\vec A|[/tex] means magnitude of [tex]\vec A[/tex], which is a scalar and is given by the square root of the sum of the squares of the magnitudes of the component vectors. [tex]|\vec{a}|\,=\,\sqrt{a^2_x+a^2_y+a^2_z}[/tex]



One could also use the fact that -j * j = - (j * j) = - (1) = -1, where I use * to mean the dot product.

Presumable j is a unit vector (0, 1, 0).

Back to the OP:

[tex]j \cdot {-j}=(1)(1)(cos(180^o))=(1)(1)(-1)=-1[/tex]
 
Last edited:
I think basically your mistake lies in your calculation of the modulus(magnitude) of -j which is 1 not -1.For use in the formula a*b=abcos#
where * means dot product
a/b mean the magnitudes(moduli) of a & b
 
Astronuc said:
One could also use the fact that -j * j = - (j * j)
How is that derived/proven?
 
mbrmbrg said:
Astronuc said:
One could also use the fact that -j * j = - (j * j)
How is that derived/proven?

The dot product operation has an associative property, that says:

[tex](k \vec A) \cdot \vec B = k (\vec A \cdot \vec B)[/tex]
Where [itex]k[/itex] is a scalar, and [itex]\vec A, \,\, \vec B[/itex] are vectors.
 
Last edited:
Riiiiiight...
I've got to start consistently thinking of a negative sign as -1 multiplied by what follows, don't I.
Thanks!
 
mbrmbrg said:
Riiiiiight...
I've got to start consistently thinking of a negative sign as -1 multiplied by what follows, don't I.
Thanks!

I remember how much grief that used to give me :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K