home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.math:18758 sci.physics:23467
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!a54si
- Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics
- Subject: Vectors Question
- Message-ID: <93025.223136A54SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
- From: <A54SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
- Date: Monday, 25 Jan 1993 22:31:36 EST
- Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
- Lines: 27
-
- I'm reading Principles of Electrodynamics by Schwartz. In it he discusses
- two types of vectors, polar (where the components negate under pure
- reflective transformation) and axial (where the components are invariant
- for pure reflective transformations).
-
- Either my thinking is wrong or he contradicts himself :
-
- Let us set c = a cross b. In my mind, if a and b are both polar or they are
- both axial then c is axial. I do this by picturing reflections performed on
- the vectors, and I am fairly certain of this result. If we try to cross two
- vectors of different types, then the c vectors before and after the
- reflection (c and c') differ in magnitude as well as direction and so
- I feel that it's impossible to cross different type vectors. Be that as it
- it may you won't get a polar vector by crossing a polar with and axial
- (Unless my mental pictures are totally wrong.)
-
- From Coulomb's law he gets that force is a polar vector. Fine.
-
- Now from magnetism we know that force F = qv cross B. Velocity v is polar.
- He's already assumed that charge q is scalar (totally invariant). From all
- this he thinks this tells us that B is axial!
-
- So my question is, how is he crossing a polar with an axial and getting a
- polar vector??
- -------
- CHARLES HOPE A54SI@CUNYVM A54SI@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
- GOVERNMENT BY REPORTERS...MEDIA-OCRACY.
-