How can the vector triple product be used to derive other vector products?

y[/itex] is the unit vector in the direction of [itex]\vec{y}[/itex] and [itex]\hat{z}[/itex] is the unit vector in the direction of [itex]\vec{z}[/itex], then the unit vectors in the directions of [itex]\vec{x}[/itex], [itex]\vec{y}[/itex], [itex]\vec{z}[/itex] become [itex]\hat{x} = \hat{x} \cdot \hat{x} \hat{x} + \hat{x} \cdot \hat{y} \hat{y} + \hat{x} \cdot \hat
  • #1
Saitama
4,243
93
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Pranav-Arora said:
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

First, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V} \cdot \mathbf{W}
= \mathbf{U} \cdot \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W} [/tex]
for any three vectors U, V, W. (Note: UxV.W means (UxV).W, etc). In other words, in a mixed vector-scalar product you can interchange the 'x' and the '.'. It is pretty easy to prove, just by expanding out both things and comparing the results.

Next, prove that
[tex] \mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})
= (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex] just by using ##\mathbf{R} \times \mathbf{S} = -\mathbf{S} \times \mathbf{R}## and applying the vector triple product you are already given.

Now apply these two facts to your problem.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
Pranav-Arora said:
I am currently going through the book Introduction Of Electrodynamics by Griffiths. I have come across vector triple product which is stated as follows in the book:

$$\textbf{A} \times (\textbf{B} \times \textbf{C})=\textbf{B}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{C})-\textbf{C}(\textbf{A}\cdot \textbf{B})$$
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I don't see how I can derive the above using the vector triple product. :confused:

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

First interchange the signs of '×' and '.'

$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D) = A\times B \times C \cdot D$$

Which gives

$$[(A \cdot C)B - (B \cdot C)A] \cdot D $$

And finally,

$$[(A \cdot C)(B \cdot D) - (B \cdot C)(A \cdot D)] $$
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #4
Ray Vickson said:
First, prove that
[tex]\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V} \cdot \mathbf{W}
= \mathbf{U} \cdot \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W} [/tex]
for any three vectors U, V, W. (Note: UxV.W means (UxV).W, etc). In other words, in a mixed vector-scalar product you can interchange the 'x' and the '.'. It is pretty easy to prove, just by expanding out both things and comparing the results.
Thanks, didn't notice that it was a scalar triple product. :)

Next, prove that
[tex] \mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})
= (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex] just by using ##\mathbf{R} \times \mathbf{S} = -\mathbf{S} \times \mathbf{R}## and applying the vector triple product you are already given.

Now apply these two facts to your problem.

I did not require this in proving what I wanted to but still I would like to know how would you prove this. Here's how I tried:

Applying the vector triple product on LHS:
$$V(U\cdot W)-W(U\cdot V)$$

The RHS is:
$$-W \times (U \times V)$$
$$=-(U(W\cdot V)-V(W \cdot U))$$
$$=V(W \cdot U)-U(W\cdot V)$$

They don't turn out to be the same. :confused:
 
  • #5
Ray Vickson said:
Next, prove that
[tex] \mathbf{U} \times ( \mathbf{V} \times \mathbf{W})
= (\mathbf{U} \times \mathbf{V}) \times \mathbf{W},[/tex]
That's just wrong, Ray. The cross product is not associative.
 
  • #6
Pranav-Arora said:
The author then states a few more vector products and says that they can be derived using the vector triple product. One of them I am unable to derive is :
$$(A\times B)\cdot (C\times D)=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$
You can use both the scalar triple product and vector triple product to prove this identity. Denote ##U=C \times D##. With this substitution, ##(A \times B) \cdot (C \times D) = (A \times B) \cdot U##. See if you can take it from here, using the scalar triple product and then the vector triple product.
 
  • #7
D H said:
You can use both the scalar triple product and vector triple product to prove this identity. Denote ##U=C \times D##. With this substitution, ##(A \times B) \cdot (C \times D) = (A \times B) \cdot U##. See if you can take it from here, using the scalar triple product and then the vector triple product.

I did exactly the same to prove it. I stated it in my previous reply.

$$(A \times B)\cdot U=A\cdot (B\times (C\times D))$$
$$=A\cdot(C(B\cdot D)-D(B\cdot C))=(A\cdot C)(B\cdot D)-(A\cdot D)(B\cdot C)$$

I have a few more doubts regarding vector proofs but they involve the del operator, should I post them here even though it is a precalculus section?
 
  • #8
Pranav-Arora said:
I did exactly the same to prove it. I stated it in my previous reply.
Sorry, I didn't see that post. I saw your post where you trued (but failed) to prove the associativity of the cross product.

[EDIT]: That should be tried, not trued.

The cross product is not associative in general. Since the cross product is anti-commutative, ##(A \times B) \times C = - C \times (A \times B) = C \times (B \times A)##. Now this is in a form where you can use the vector triple product rule: ##(A \times B) \times C = C \times (B \times A) = B (A \cdot C) - A (B \cdot C)##. The difference between ##A \times (B \times C)## and ##(A \times B) \times C## is thus ##A \times (B \times C) - (A \times B) \times C = C (A \cdot B) - A (B \cdot C)##. This is zero if both ##A \cdot B## and ##B \cdot C## are zero or if C is parallel to A (i.e., ##C=\alpha A## where alpha is a scalar). The difference is non-zero otherwise, and hence the two forms are not equal to one another in general.

Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.
I have a few more doubts regarding vector proofs but they involve the del operator, should I post them here even though it is a precalculus section?
It's best to post those questions in the calculus section.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #9
D H said:
Sorry, I didn't see that post. I saw your post where you trued (but failed) to prove the associativity of the cross product.

The cross product is not associative in general. Since the cross product is anti-commutative, ##(A \times B) \times C = - C \times (A \times B) = C \times (B \times A)##. Now this is in a form where you can use the vector triple product rule: ##(A \times B) \times C = C \times (B \times A) = B (A \cdot C) - A (B \cdot C)##. The difference between ##A \times (B \times C)## and ##(A \times B) \times C## is thus ##A \times (B \times C) - (A \times B) \times C = C (A \cdot B) - A (B \cdot C)##. This is zero if both ##A \cdot B## and ##B \cdot C## are zero or if C is parallel to A (i.e., ##C=\alpha A## where alpha is a scalar). The difference is non-zero otherwise, and hence the two forms are not equal to one another in general.

Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.

Thanks a lot DH for such wonderful tips. I have made a note of these. :smile:
 
  • #10
D H said:
Note that the above means that ##U \times (V \times U)## and ##(U \times V) \times U## are equal to one another. This comes up quite often.
A couple more points on this. One is that since ##U \times (V \times U) = (U \times V) \times U## the parentheses can be omitted in this case: It's okay to write ##U \times V \times U##. Note that writing ##U \times V \times W## is *not* okay. Parentheses are needed in the general case.

The other is that one reason this comes up quite often is that it is closely related to the component of V that is perpendicular to U, which I'll designate as ##V_{\perp_U}##. One way to calculate the component of V that is normal to U is to subtract the projection of V onto U from V. The projection is given by ##\frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##, and thus the normal component is ##V_{\perp_U} = V - \frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2} = \frac{V (U \cdot U) - U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##. The numerator is ##U\times (V \times U) = U \times V \times U##. Thus ##V_{\perp_U} = \frac {U \times V \times U}{U^2}##. If U is a unit vector, this reduces to ##U \times V \times U##.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #11
D H said:
A couple more points on this. One is that since ##U \times (V \times U) = (U \times V) \times U## the parentheses can be omitted in this case: It's okay to write ##U \times V \times U##. Note that writing ##U \times V \times W## is *not* okay. Parentheses are needed in the general case.

The other is that one reason this comes up quite often is that it is closely related to the component of V that is perpendicular to U, which I'll designate as ##V_{\perp_U}##. One way to calculate the component of V that is normal to U is to subtract the projection of V onto U from V. The projection is given by ##\frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##, and thus the normal component is ##V_{\perp_U} = V - \frac {U (V \cdot U)} {U^2} = \frac{V (U \cdot U) - U (V \cdot U)} {U^2}##. The numerator is ##U\times (V \times U) = U \times V \times U##. Thus ##V_{\perp_U} = \frac {U \times V \times U}{U^2}##. If U is a unit vector, this reduces to ##U \times V \times U##.

Thank you once again D H! :)
 
  • #12
Pranav-Arora said:
Thanks, didn't notice that it was a scalar triple product. :)



I did not require this in proving what I wanted to but still I would like to know how would you prove this. Here's how I tried:

Applying the vector triple product on LHS:
$$V(U\cdot W)-W(U\cdot V)$$

The RHS is:
$$-W \times (U \times V)$$
$$=-(U(W\cdot V)-V(W \cdot U))$$
$$=V(W \cdot U)-U(W\cdot V)$$

They don't turn out to be the same. :confused:

You are right, sorry. Anyway, you don't need anything like that.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person

Related to How can the vector triple product be used to derive other vector products?

1. What is the vector triple product dilemma?

The vector triple product dilemma is a mathematical problem that arises when trying to determine the direction of the cross product of three vectors. It is also known as the "left-hand rule" problem, as it can be difficult to determine whether the resulting vector should be pointing in the direction of the left hand or the right hand when using the cross product formula.

2. Why is the vector triple product dilemma important?

The vector triple product dilemma is important because it is a common issue that arises in vector calculus and has applications in physics and engineering. It also highlights the importance of understanding vector operations and their properties, as well as the use of clear notation and conventions in mathematics.

3. How can the vector triple product dilemma be resolved?

There are a few ways to resolve the vector triple product dilemma. One way is to use the right-hand rule, which states that the resulting vector should be pointing in the direction of the right hand when using the cross product formula. Another way is to use the triple scalar product, which involves taking the dot product of one vector with the cross product of the other two vectors.

4. What are some common mistakes when dealing with the vector triple product dilemma?

One common mistake when dealing with the vector triple product dilemma is forgetting to use the correct order of vectors when using the cross product formula. Another mistake is not taking into account the orientation of the vectors, which can result in incorrect direction of the resulting vector.

5. Are there any real-world applications of the vector triple product dilemma?

Yes, there are many real-world applications of the vector triple product dilemma. It is commonly used in physics and engineering to calculate torque, angular momentum, and magnetic fields. It is also used in computer graphics to determine the orientation of objects in 3D space.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
696
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
276
  • Classical Physics
Replies
3
Views
743
Replies
1
Views
989
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top