0
$\begingroup$

I am teaching Pre-Cal at a community college. In all Pre-Cal textbooks, we have this definition of cross product of two vectors:

If $\textbf{u} = \langle a_1, a_2, a_3 \rangle$ and $\textbf{v} = \langle b_1, b_2, b_3 \rangle$ are two 3-dimensional vectors, then the cross product of the two is the vector: $$\textbf{u} \times \textbf{v} = \langle a_2b_3-a_3b_2, a_3b_1-a_1b_3, a_1b_2-a_2b_1 \rangle.$$

But so far I haven't seen any textbooks that suggest using this definition to solve a cross product problems, instead they invariably suggest using the determinant of matrix of order two.

And here is my question: Is this simply because the determinant method is easier to remember, or is this because there is some other deeper reason? I am posting this question because one of my students use this definition when solving a problem on test.

Thank you for your time and effort.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is easier to remember the determinant method. I just realised that you were the teacher. Why do you want to use the formula method? was this the way you were taught? $\endgroup$ – Chinny84 Nov 19 '15 at 15:16
  • $\begingroup$ The determinant $\begin{vmatrix} i & j & k \\ a_1 & a_2 & a_3 \\ b_1 & b_2 & b_3\end{vmatrix}$ isn't even a genuine determinant (how can you define the determinant of a matrix with some vector entries and some scalar entries?). It is only ever meant as a way to remember the actual formula which you've given in your question. (Even though I have the cross product components memorized at this point) I personally would rather just remember the algebraic rules (like anticommutativity) of the cross product and derive that formula whenever needed. $\endgroup$ – user137731 Nov 19 '15 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ There are actually a few ways to attach meaning to the determinant formula as discussed here $\endgroup$ – rVitale Nov 19 '15 at 15:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ha! I love mathematicians. Every time someone comes up with a simple notation that's just supposed to reduce clutter you guys have to come along and go "but could we attach a rigorous meaning to it?". ;) $\endgroup$ – user137731 Nov 19 '15 at 15:30
  • $\begingroup$ @Bye_World Whilst I agree with your statement, being an ex-physicist myself and all, I think the OP was looking for a deeper meaning! My "simple" mind can not compute this and only approximate at best :). $\endgroup$ – Chinny84 Nov 19 '15 at 15:38
2
$\begingroup$

Just a comment on this:

In school it took me so long to get that formula into my brain. Then I was shown that you can combine this definition of the cross product with a very illustrative scheme. From this scheme also the name cross product makes sense, I'm sure everyone will remember this easily. Just write down your vectors $a=[a_1,a_2,a_3]$ and $b=[b_1,b_2,b_3]$ twice and do as follows:Scheme for the cross product

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.