First equation, you finding AB (the lambda part), looks like you have 1-1 = -2?Question is easy but I cannot find my mistake.
Not sure if this is the standard method but this is according to the method I was taught.
Correct answer is 1/√2
Oh my bad that was a typo. Fixing it nowFirst equation, you finding AB (the lambda part), looks like you have 1-1 = -2?
A method for finding the points on two skew lines that are nearest each other is described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skew_lines#Nearest_Points .Need help with c)
If you're in Cartesian form to start with, your first method is good. If you're in point-normal form to start with, we can convert it to Cartesian form and then use your first method.Say I want equations for the plane through (1,2,-2) perpendicular to (-1,1,2)T
Cartesian and point-normal forms are easy
-x1+x2+x3 = dot product
(-1,1,2)T.(x-(1,2,-2)T)=0
All three forms are pretty easy. But what's the fastest way to go from any one of them to a parametric vector equation? (Just a simple answer will do, no need to finish the question)
Two methods I thought about:
1. Let x2 = lambda and x3 = mu
2. Cross (-1,1,2) with any arbitrary non-zero vector to get a right hand system and then take the two that aren't (-1,1,2)
This is known as Gram-Schmidt orthogonalisation (or orthonormalisation if we normalise the vectors too). Basically the idea is that given a set of vectors, from this we create a new set that has the same span and the vectors are orthogonal (so we can obtain an orthogonal basis for a vector space in this way given a basis). You can read about it here and see an animation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gram–Schmidt_process#The_Gram.E2.80.93Schmidt_processThis could just be a dot product question but I'm too tired to understand the question right now so any advice please
Procedure: