Skip to main content

Vector projection and directional cosine


Abstract

When I compute something, I see it is correct, but sometimes my intuition doesn't work. Especially, I am not good at statistics, though, sometimes I don't see geometry also. I can show you such example this time.

Vector projection and directional cosine

My friend Dietger asked me a problem. Figure 1 shows the problem. Let \(\mathbf{h}'\) is a projected vector of \(\mathbf{h}\) on the \(\mathbf{e}_1,\mathbf{e}_2\) plane of an orthogonal coordinate system. Where \(\mathbf{h}\) is an arbitrary unit vector. Let \(\mathbf{h}_1\) is the projection of \(\mathbf{h}\) on the axis \(\mathbf{e}_1\). Then show
\[
 \cos \alpha = |\mathbf{h}'| \cos \phi.
\]
It's intuitively odd for me that there is a length ratio \(h'\) between \(\cos \alpha\) and \( \cos \phi\).
Figure 1. Two projections of an unit vector \(\mathbf{h}\).

However, these are projections, therefore some \(\cos\)  relationships. Let's start with  \(\mathbf{h}_1\).  \(\mathbf{h}_1\) is a projection of  \(\mathbf{h}\) on \(\mathbf{e}_1\) axis,
\begin{eqnarray*}
 |\mathbf{h}_1| &=&  \mathbf{h}\cdot\mathbf{e}_1\\
 &=& |\mathbf{h}| |\mathbf{e}_1| \cos \alpha \\
 &=& \cos \alpha.
\end{eqnarray*}
If you noticed \(\mathbf{h}_1\) is a projection of \(\mathbf{h}'\) on \(\mathbf{e}_1\) axis,
\begin{eqnarray*}
 \mathbf{h}'\cdot\mathbf{e}_1 &=& |\mathbf{h}'||\mathbf{e}_1| \cos \phi \\
 &=& |\mathbf{h}'| \cos \phi.
\end{eqnarray*}
This is actually \(|\mathbf{h}_1|\). See the Figure 2. Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
 \cos \alpha &=& |\mathbf{h}'| \cos \phi.
\end{eqnarray*}
Figure 2. The relationship among \(\mathbf{h} \), \(\mathbf{h}'\) and \(\mathbf{h}_1\).
In the end, if you noticed \(\mathbf{h}_1\) is a direct projection of \(\mathbf{h}\) or projection of projection, there is no mystery here.

When I understand this problem as above, I recall directional cosine.  I learned this long time ago, but this idea is located nowhere in my head and no connection with other mathematical ideas. I just remember the squared sum of the cosines becomes 1. It's a kind of left out idea for me. But, if the projection is on the each axis, this is directional cosine. Then the squared sum is of course one. (Or the square root of squared sum is one. But square root of one is anyway one.) Because this is the length of unit vector, which is one. It's so simple. I don't know why I never realize the directional cosine is just coordinate elements of unit vector.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why parallelogram area is |ad-bc|?

Here is my question. The area of parallelogram is the difference of these two rectangles (red rectangle - blue rectangle). This is not intuitive for me. If you also think it is not so intuitive, you might interested in my slides. I try to explain this for hight school students. Slides:  A bit intuitive (for me) explanation of area of parallelogram  (to my site, external link) . 

Geometric Multiplicity: eignvectors (2)

If eigenvectors of a matrix A are independent, it is a happy property. Because the matrix A can be diagonalized with a matrix S that column vectors are eigenvectors of A . For example, Why this is a happy property of A? Because I can find A's power easily. A^{10} is not a big deal. Because Λ is a diagonal matrix and power of a diagonal matrix is quite simple. A^{10} = SΛ^{10} S^{-1} Then, why if I want to compute power of A ? That is the same reason to find eigenvectors. Eigenvectors are a basis of a matrix. A matrix can be represented by a single scalar. I repeat this again. This is the happy point, a matrix becomes a scalar. What can be simpler than a scalar value. But, this is only possible when the matrix S's columns are independent. Because S^{-1} must be exist. Now I come back to my first question. Is the λ's multiplicity related with the number of eigenvectors? This time I found this has the name. Geometric multiplicity (GM): the number of in...

Gauss's quote for positive, negative, and imaginary number

Recently I watched the following great videos about imaginary numbers by Welch Labs. https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU?list=PLiaHhY2iBX9g6KIvZ_703G3KJXapKkNaF I like this article about naming of math by Kalid Azad. https://betterexplained.com/articles/learning-tip-idea-name/ Both articles mentioned about Gauss, who suggested to use other names of positive, negative, and imaginary numbers. Gauss wrote these names are wrong and that is one of the reason people didn't get why negative times negative is positive, or, pure positive imaginary times pure positive imaginary is negative real number. I made a few videos about explaining why -1 * -1 = +1, too. Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by pattern https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by climbing a mountain https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 But actually Gauss's insight is much powerful. The original is in the Gauß, Werke, Bd. 2, S. 178 . Hätte man +1, -1, √-1) nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar um...