Re: Formal operations with vectors and scalars
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg70574] Re: Formal operations with vectors and scalars
- From: dh <dh at metrohm.ch>
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 05:21:37 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <email@example.com>
I am wondering why you define reflection by: nv.(av+rv) = 0. This is
certainly not more fundamental than: rv = av - 2 nv (av.nv). This comes
from specifying that the sign of the component normal to the surface: nv
(av.nv) is reversed. That is, the the change is -2 nv (av.nv), what is
clearly visible in the above formula.
Dr. Wolfgang Hintze wrote:
> Hello group,
> I'm trying - unsuccessfully - to derive formally simple relations with
> vectors and scalars using Mathematica.
> As an example consider the reflexion of a ray of light with initial
> direction av (unit vector) from a surface at a point with a normal unit
> vector nv.
> As ist well known the reflected (unit) vector rv will be given by
> rv = av - 2 nv (av.nv)
> where av.nv is the scalar product of av and nv.
> My question is: how do I derive this relation using Mathematica?
> (Sorry for bothering you with the derivation, but I need this exposition
> to show the points where I have difficulties.)
> With pencil and paper I would start by writing rv as a linaer
> combination of av and nv, using two scalar constants A and B to be
> determined, i.e.
> rv = A av + B nv
> Now the condition of reflexion can be written
> nv.(av+rv) = 0
> Using (1) to replace rv this reads (remembering also that (nv.nv) = 1)
> 0 = (nv.av) + A (nv.av) + B
> Solving for B gives B = - (nv.av) (1+A). Putting this into (1) leads to
> rv = A av - nv (nv.av) (1+A)
> Squaring this should give 1:
> = 1 = A^2 + (nv.av)^2 (1+A)^2 - 2 A (1+A) (nv.av)^2
> = A^2 + (nv.av)^2 ( 1 + A^2 + 2 A -2 A - 2 A^2)
> = A^2 + (nv.av)^2 (1-A^2)
> = A^2 (1-(nv.av)^2) + (nv.av)^2
> (1-(nv.av)^2) = A^2 (1-(nv.av)^2)
> A = +- 1
> in view of (1') we must select the positive sign.
> Now, how would I proceed in Mathematica?
> I would write down (1) as well, would next impose (2).
> Here the first difficulty appears because Mathematica does not know that av, nv
> and rv designate vectors, the dot product is not distributed, the
> scalars A and B are not recognized either.
> I tried Simplify with conditions but this didn't help...
> Can you please outline how to tackle this derivation with Mathematica?
> Many thanks in advance.
Prev by Date:
Re: damped oscilations data fit
Next by Date:
Re: sum of binomials .. bug ?
Previous by thread:
RE: Formal operations with vectors and scalars
Next by thread:
a simple product, but with "i = 1...n AND i != x"