Why is the dot product equivalent to matrix multiplication?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the equivalence of the dot product and matrix multiplication, emphasizing the geometric interpretation of the dot product as a projection of one vector onto another. The user seeks an intuitive understanding rather than formal proofs, highlighting the importance of recognizing how vectors can be expressed in terms of their components. Key insights include the necessity of selecting a basis for vector representation and the relationship between bilinearity and tensor representation. The discussion references a video by 3Blue1Brown and a PDF that elaborates on the geometry of various vector products.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector components and representation
  • Familiarity with geometric interpretations of linear algebra
  • Basic knowledge of matrix multiplication
  • Concept of bilinear forms and tensors
NEXT STEPS
  • Watch the 3Blue1Brown video on vector projections and dot products
  • Read the PDF on the geometry of vector products available at arxiv.org
  • Explore linear transformations and their relationship to matrix multiplication
  • Study the properties of bilinear forms and their applications in tensor analysis
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who seek a deeper understanding of linear algebra concepts, particularly those interested in the geometric interpretations of vector operations.

rdgn
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Why is the dot product equivalent to the matrix multiplication of its components?

I've seen some proofs using Pythagorean and cosine law but they don't give you an intuitive feel as to why matrix multiplication works.

The geometric definition (##ab cosθ##) is very easy to understand. To a certain extent, I can understand why matrix multiplication works when either vector ##a## or ##b## is parallel to the x or y-axis since the product would ultimately simplify to the geometric definition, but I don't understand why it works for any arbitrary vector.

Can anyone give an intuition of why this works? (not proof/s, since I've already seen some)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the definition of a dot product, that is acceptable for you? This is important since you basically ask, why two definitions are equivalent. So what's yours?
 
Well, based on the intuition of the geometric definition, it's simply how much of a certain vector goes into another vector. (or more formally), how much of a vector is projected into another vector multiplied by the magnitude of that vector. Also, a measure of how much they point in the same direction.

Btw, I found this video by 3b1b (youtube.com/watch?v=LyGKycYT2v0), I think it's great but it might take a while before the idea sinks into my head (and i should familiarize myself more with linear transformations).
 
A major point is, as soon as you write vectors ##v## as ##(v_1,v_2,\ldots)## and perform matrix multiplications you will have to chose some basis first to make sense of the components. Thus you will have to bridge the gap between a purely geometric point of view and the algebraic view in terms of numbers, components first.

An interesting read about the various products can be found on the first pages of this pdf:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.5935.pdf
It stresses the geometry behind those products (dot-product, ##\wedge##-product).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest
You can also argue that the dot product is bilinear and so it is a 2-tensor. Tensors of total (meaning sum of covariant and contravariant indices) order ## \leq 2 ## can be represented as a standard matrix ( order 1) or as a quadratic form (order 2 ).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K