3
$\begingroup$

Let $E$ be an Euclidian oriented vector space of dimension $3$ and $x,y,u,w \in E$.

How do we prove (without coodinates) $$ \det \begin{pmatrix} \langle x,u \rangle & \langle x,w \rangle \\ \langle y,u \rangle & \langle y,w \rangle \\ \end{pmatrix} = \langle x \times y, u \times w \rangle$$

This equality is claimed in this proof of the double cross product formula.

Related : wiki claims that the Gram determinant is equal to : $Gram(x_1,\dots,x_n) = \| x_1 \wedge \dots \wedge x_n \|^2$

How is defined the norm on the exterior product, and how to prove this formula ?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It should be $⟨x∧y,u∧w⟩$, $x∧u$ will never produce $⟨x,u⟩$ as part of a general Gramian matrix. $\endgroup$ – LutzL May 22 '14 at 14:05
  • $\begingroup$ Right, there are some typos. $\endgroup$ – user10676 May 22 '14 at 15:45
1
$\begingroup$

I'm not really sure if you can prove it or simply take it as definition of the scalar product. You can derive it from the definition of a scalar product on the tensor space.

Or just notice that the Gramian determinant $$ \det\begin{pmatrix} \langle x,u \rangle & \langle x,w \rangle \\ \langle y,u \rangle & \langle y,w \rangle \\ \end{pmatrix} $$ is already symmetric in $x∧y$ and $u∧w$. Considering it as a function in $x$ and $y$, $$ \phi(x,y)=\det\begin{pmatrix} \langle x,u \rangle & \langle x,w \rangle \\ \langle y,u \rangle & \langle y,w \rangle \\ \end{pmatrix} $$ one notices that it is bilinear, anti-symmetric, and so (extendable as) a linear form on $\Lambda^2E$. Further, $$ \phi(u,w)=\langle u,u \rangle \langle w,w \rangle - \langle u,w \rangle^2=\|u\|^2\|w-\lambda u\|^2 $$ where $λ=\frac{\langle u,w \rangle}{\|u\|^2}$, tells us that this quadratic form is the square of the area of the parallelogram spanned by $u$ and $v$, which proves its positive definiteness.

Of course, all this reasoning is greatly simplified by using the Binet-Cauchy-formulas for the coordinates of the vectors.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

A proof using clifford algebra.

First, write the dot product of two cross products in terms of bivectors.

$$(x \times y) \cdot (u \times w) = (-i)(-i) (x \wedge y) \cdot (u \wedge w)$$

Then, break down the inner product of bivectors into a vector-bivector product and a vector-vector inner product.

$$(x \wedge y) \cdot (u \wedge w) = ([x \wedge y] \cdot u) \cdot w$$

nb. These are actually wedge products I'm using, not cross products.

Then, apply the BAC-CAB rule:

$$[x \wedge y] \cdot u = x (y \cdot u) - y (x \cdot u)$$

The result is

$$([x \wedge y] \cdot u) \cdot w = (x \cdot w)(y \cdot u) - (y \cdot w)(x \cdot u)$$

which is identical to the determinant you were asked to find (within the minus sign that I dropped at the beginning for clarity).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How to do you prove the BAC-CAB rule? I was first looking to prove BAC-CAB (it is called double crossed product formula in french), but it seemed more natural for me to ask in term of Gram determinant. $\endgroup$ – user10676 May 22 '14 at 15:51
  • $\begingroup$ You can prove the BAC-CAB rule using cyclic permutations of the vectors. I did this in math.stackexchange.com/a/305315/45296 as an example. It's a bit of a pain and not clearly better than breaking down into components and using a basis, in my opinion. $\endgroup$ – Muphrid May 22 '14 at 16:36

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.