engineering fundamentals Discussion Forum
Directory | Career | News | Standards | Industrial | SpecSearch®
Home Membership Magazines Forum Search Member Calculators

Materials

Design

Processes

Units

Formulas

Math
List Recent Topics | Start a New Topic
 

<< Previous Message No. 6763 Next >>
Author: ozogg
Time: 04/13/01 06:51 PST
This is a reply to message no. 6761 by zapboy
Reply | Original Message | New Topic | List Topics | List Messages on This Topic
Current Topic:
Rotation as a vector
Now this message 6761 from Zapboy displays even worse understanding (than originally) of vectors.

LESSON 1.
A first position can defined as vector ~r1, with reference to some origin; a second position can be defined as vector ~r2;  the linear displacement from position one to two is a third vector ~r3 = ~r2 - ~r1.

If all these vectors were co-linear, then the magnitude of the displacement r3 can be obtained by arithmetic (scalar) subtraction, but the direction of r3 does not disappear, it is still a VECTOR, not a SCALAR as Zapboy so egregiously machinates.

DEFINITION 1
Yes the original question DID state that (linear) displacement is a vector, and that is correct.

DEFINITION 2
The original question went on to ask if (angular) displacement is also a vector.  IT IS NOT !!

CONCLUSION
Zapboy contributes no increase to the body of human knowledge by his constant cavilling with words, rather than pursuing exact understanding.

ozogg
[ List Replies to This Message Only ]

Home  Membership  About Us  Privacy  Disclaimer  Contact  Advertise

Copyright © 2017 eFunda, Inc.