• We are looking for new moderators to join the Bored of Studies team!
    Click here for details
  • Looking for HSC notes and resources?
    Check out our Notes & Resources page

Vector help (1 Viewer)

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,945
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
I don't know how to do the column vector in LaTeX; so I'll use the horizontal equivalent.

Q7.



Therefore the same line.

For vector eqn of a line: you have one (any one of the infinite number of) points on the line and a direction vector, in this case [1, 1, 2] or any nonzero multiple of this vector, like 2 x [1, 1, 2] = [2, 2, 4]. This is like being able to specify the eqn of a line in your Yr-9 or Yr-10 co-ordinate geometry, given one point on the line and its direction (i.e. the gradient).

So for this particular line, its vector equation is not unique, because you can choose any one point on the line, and any equivalent direction vector, which is a portion, or a multiple, of any one direction vector. So the two different vector equations given are just 2 of the infinite number of equivalent vector equations of the line.

You could have done this question by showing the point (2, 1, 3) lies on the 2nd line (how? by finding a value of lambda-2 in line-2 that will give you the 1st point) and the point (3, 2, 5) on the 2nd line lies on the 1st line, provided these 2 points are distinct, i.e. not the same point.
 
Last edited:

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,945
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Q6.

Can use as direction vector: [2, 5, 3] = [2, 7, 4] - [ 0, 2, 1]
So a vector eqn of the line is: [x, y, z] = [0, 2, 1] + k[2, 5, 3]
Parametric eqns: x = 2k, y = 2 + 5k, z = 1 + 3k
When y = 1, 2 + 5k = 1 ==> k = -1/5
Therefore a1 = 2k = -2/5 and a3 = 1-3/5 = 2/5

Here I've found a vector equation of the line. I then found the value of the parameter lambda corresp. to the point on it with y = 1 (there is only one such point). You can then use this value of lambda to find the corresponding value of z, or "a3".
 
Last edited:

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,945
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Q8.

You are here given the Cartesian equation of a line.



You can now write down a vector eqn of the line.

Here, rewrite the Cartesian eqn is a standard form. You can then read off the components of the direction vector and the co-ords of the point on the line. If you don't like fractions, you can use an equivalent direction vector like 6x[ . . . ] = [-42, 10, 9].
 
Last edited:

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,945
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Q9.

So a vector eqn of the line is:



Here, a direction vector is found by subtracting the position vector of one point, viz: [2, 2, 1] from that of the other, [5, 1, -2]
 
Last edited:

CM_Tutor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Question 7



Comments and Solution #1

This question is (conceptually) the equivalent of showing that



is the same as

.

@Drongoski has taken the same approach to this 3D line as would be taken for the 2D line problem... rewriting one form of the equation into the other, involving finding a relationship between and .




Solution #2(a) and (b)

A different approach is to show that the relationship between and is the same for each of the three coordinate axes. That is, if



Then, in the -direction, we have



And, in the -direction, we have



And, in the -direction, we have



This proof could also be constructed by using the result from the -direction to get that



and then substitute into the second equation and show that the first results:

 

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,945
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Question 7



Comments and Solution #1

This question is (conceptually) the equivalent of showing that



is the same as

.

@Drongoski has taken the same approach to this 3D line as would be taken for the 2D line problem... rewriting one form of the equation into the other, involving finding a relationship between and .




Solution #2(a) and (b)

A different approach is to show that the relationship between and is the same for each of the three coordinate axes. That is, if



Then, in the -direction, we have



And, in the -direction, we have



And, in the -direction, we have



This proof could also be constructed by using the result from the -direction to get that



and then substitute into the second equation and show that the first results:

 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top