0
$\begingroup$

I have a linear transformation represented by a skew symmetric matrix $S(\vec b(t))$ of rank $2$, which in my context, is the cross-product matrix of magnetic field $\vec b(t)$. I have explained what a cross product matrix is towards the end.

I know that its kernel is the set of all vectors collinear to $\vec b(t)$ (since cross product of a non-zero vector with another non-zero vector is zero if and only if the other vector is collinear to it). Now, this fact is used to imply that the linear transformation can never give a vector collinear to $\vec b(t)$ as output. I do not understand why this implication is true.

Cross product matrix refers to the matrix $S(\vec b(t))$ such that, $$ \vec a\times \vec b = S(\vec b)a $$ where $a$ is a $3 \times 1$ column matrix.

Note: Just in case this might be helpful to someone, in my case, I have torque, $$\tau = S(\vec b(t))m_{coils}$$ where $m_{coils}$ is the magnetic moment generated by current carrying coils. Now the above fact is used to imply torque can never be along magnetic field vector.

Edit: This can be trivially shown using the fact that $\vec a\times \vec b$ is perpendicular to $\vec b$. But the implication made in the paper I am reading seems to have been made solely based on the fact that kernel is given by $\vec b$. Now, I maybe wrong here in this interpretation or the paper itself might have a mistake but the wording there seems to be saying this.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ In your particular case, you just need the fact that $\vec{a}\times\vec{b}$ is orthogonal to $\vec{b}$ $\endgroup$ – Poon Levi Apr 7 at 13:03
  • $\begingroup$ @PoonLevi Yes true, when you look at it that way, its trivial. But the implication made in the paper I have been reading seems only from the fact that kernel is given by $\vec b(t)$. I have edited my question to make this clear. $\endgroup$ – Niket Parikh Apr 7 at 13:19
1
$\begingroup$

Inspired by the $3\times 3$ case (which reduces to a cross product), we may consider the quantity $u^T M v$, where $u$ is in the kernel of $M$, $v$ is an arbitrary column vector and $M$ is skew-symmetric. But we have $$u^T M v=-(Mu)^T v=0$$ Hence a non-zero real vector cannot belong to both the kernel and range of $M$.

$\endgroup$

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.