Why is aX(bXc)=(a*c)b-(a*b)c reasonable? (vectors)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Quisquis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vectors
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The equation ax(bxc)=(a*c)b-(a*b)c is a vector identity that demonstrates the relationship between the cross product and dot product in vector algebra. The left-hand side, ax(bxc), represents the vector a crossed with the vector resulting from the cross product of b and c. The right-hand side combines the dot products of a with b and c, indicating that the result is a linear combination of vectors b and c. This identity is reasonable because the direction of the vector (bxc) is orthogonal to the plane formed by b and c, and thus the resulting vector from ax(bxc) must also relate to these vectors.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector operations, specifically cross product and dot product.
  • Familiarity with vector algebra and geometric interpretations of vectors.
  • Knowledge of the properties of perpendicular vectors in three-dimensional space.
  • Basic proficiency in manipulating vector equations and identities.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the cross product and its geometric interpretations.
  • Learn how to derive vector identities involving both cross and dot products.
  • Explore applications of vector identities in physics, particularly in mechanics.
  • Investigate the implications of vector directionality in three-dimensional space.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics and mathematics, particularly those studying vector calculus or mechanics, as well as educators seeking to explain vector identities and their applications.

Quisquis
Messages
52
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that ax(bxc)=(a*c)b-(a*b)c. Why is it reasonable that ax(bxc) is some combination of b and c?

[The * indicates the dot product in this case because I can't find the appropriate latex symbol]

The Attempt at a Solution



I've shown the first part, but have no real idea how to describe the second. The best I've got so far:

It is reasonable because b and c are components of the final cross product with a.

That definitely seems lacking to me.

Any help on how to answer the 2nd part of the question would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
why not just show it by expanding both sides?

for the resonable part, think of the direction of the vector (bxc) relative to b & c, then the direction of ax(bxc)
 
lanedance said:
why not just show it by expanding both sides?

for the resonable part, think of the direction of the vector (bxc) relative to b & c, then the direction of ax(bxc)

I did expand both sides for the first part. I'm satisfied with that (it's a full page lol).

I know (bxc) is perpendicular to the plane defined by b and c.

Is the final resulting vector parallel to the plane defined by b and c (thinking about it, it seems like it would be)?
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
1K