network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 2 years |
| seen | 11 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 14 |
|
May 14 |
awarded | Caucus |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? I know that these are different. My question is why, since geometrically in translation the angle between the vectors is preserved but in a different origin. How this preservation can be interpreted with equivalent $cos$ ?Should i transform the vectors somehow in order to show that $cos$ before and after translation is the same? |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? My question if for the cosinus not after scaling. After scaling is the same. But after translation. |
|
Apr 10 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Dot product of two vectors without a common origin @penartur How you can get the angle for two vectors with no common start point 0?Is there a formula or a transformation? |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? @JavierBadia i add the scalar to each dimension seperately as with unltiplication |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? Technically how i can do than?Lets say i have two two dimensional vectors x=[1,2] and y=[2,3].I translate the first by 3 so x'=[5,6] and the second by 4 y'=[6,7]. if i compute cosinus on x' and y' now is different |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? According to the site it preserves angles but if you apply it to cosinus when you add a scalar to each dimension of the vector then the result is different. Maybe i have to transform the vectors after translation before i compute the cosinus.Or their is another formula i miss when the start of the vectors is not equevalent |
|
Apr 10 |
asked | Why translation of vectors doesn't preserve the cosinus of the angle they form? |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Is there any difference between the definition of a commutative ring and field? @ChrisEagle is 1 equal with 0 in commutative ring? |
|
Apr 10 |
accepted | Is there any difference between the definition of a commutative ring and field? |
|
Feb 26 |
accepted | Prove $ \frac{0}{N} + \frac{1}{N} + \ldots + \frac{q-1}{N} =\frac{q(q-1)}{2N}$ |
|
Feb 26 |
asked | Prove $ \frac{0}{N} + \frac{1}{N} + \ldots + \frac{q-1}{N} =\frac{q(q-1)}{2N}$ |
|
Oct 9 |
accepted | How can i reconstruct a polynomial with access to its roots and not to some points evaluation of it? |
|
Oct 9 |
accepted | Does common eigenvectors between two matrices A,B implies some property for the vectors? |
|
Oct 9 |
comment |
How can i reconstruct a polynomial with access to its roots and not to some points evaluation of it? right. But is there something special on the evaluation on 0 that makes it sufficient to reconstruct it with less than d+1 points? |
|
Oct 9 |
asked | How can i reconstruct a polynomial with access to its roots and not to some points evaluation of it? |
|
Sep 27 |
accepted | How difficult is it to find a Matrix A if i give you it’s multiplication with an eigenvector? Assuming my matrix is big enough |
|
Sep 26 |
comment |
How difficult is it to find a Matrix A if i give you it’s multiplication with an eigenvector? Assuming my matrix is big enough I only have $A \times x$ |
|
Sep 26 |
asked | How difficult is it to find a Matrix A if i give you it’s multiplication with an eigenvector? Assuming my matrix is big enough |
