Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
W. F. Esterhuyse
October 2009
It is possible to derive the four dimensional cross product in the following way. We first define
the
space from n-k dimensional spaces (n > k > 1). We define the operation to respect both the
(+ - + -) structure of the cross product and the signature of the (flat) n dimensional space. To
obtain a 3D space from 2D spaces we need to superimpose three 2 dimensional planes at right
angles to each other. A 2D plane is defined by three points. Choosing two planes and four
vectors
in them such that each pair of vectors are orthogonal, we form "&" of the two planes by
superimposing two vectors from different planes such that the other two are orthogoal and the
origin
of both pairs coincide. In this way we can form a right handed or left handed 3D space by the
appropriate labelling of the resulting three vectors spannning the 3D space. The three vectors
Taking the 3D space as right handed we may conceivably choose two vectors u and v in the
that is:
obtained by taking the vector product in the 2D subspaces as in RS (1). We need the first "&" just
like we would if "&" was "-".
We see that the above construction applies. Superimposing two 2-planes by leaving out the
plane of [2] and [3] is not valid (if considering the 3D space spanned by surfaces) since then
Now, since we know how the 3D cross product is defined, we can work out what the "&"
the rule to take "&" to (+ or -) is development of (4) while respecting the + - + order of the
determinant. We note that this is a flat 3D space with signature: (+++). Thus the construction (1)
Taking this process further we let u and v be two vectors in a flat 4D space. Then by the
uxv = & uxv|123 & uxv|124 & uxv|134 & uxv|234 (4)
with:
RS = & [1] [2] [3] & [1] [2] [4] & [1] [3] [4] & [2] [3] [4] (5)
u1 u2 u3 u1 u2 u4 u1 u3 u4 u2 u3 u4
v1 v2 v3 v1 v2 v4 v1 v3 v4 v2 v3 v4
and the "&" operation must reflect development of (6) to obtain (5) with the correct signs.
The process to determine the correct transitions from "&" to "+ or -" requires a bit of a leap
but the results can be tested for fit into the properties of the cross product. The process
to determine this is by explicitly deleting the i'th column in (6), and shifting the remaining
columns left such that all deleted columns are at rightmost while indices still increases to the
right. Count the amount of shifts required (say this is s) and change "&" of the term into "+" if s
[1] [2] [3] [4] = & [1] [2] [3] [] & [1] [2] [] [4] & [1] [] [3] [4] & [] [2] [3] [4] (7)
u1 u2 u3 u4 u1 u2 u3 [] u1 u2 [] u4 u1 [] u3 u4 [] u2 u3 u4
v1 v2 v3 v4 v1 v2 v3 [] v1 v2 [] v4 v1 [] v3 v4 [] v2 v3 v4
where the ellipses are the corresponding 3x3 subdeterminant of the term above it, just
after the shifts and with the deleted column left out. This is the correct process to determine
what "&" changes into since in 5D we would have two deleted columns (then assigning a
"+ or - " by just looking what column got deleted is invalid). This method is valid for evaluating
any non-square determinant (by row) having rows longer than columns. This method is equivalent
to first developing (6) by row 1 like an ordinary determinant to obtain unit vectors mutiplied by 2x3
We state the change if the signature is not (++++) ( the first row signs is + - + - with this
signature). Say the signature is (+++ -) then the first row signs changes to: + - + +, and this is
implemented by developing LS (7) by row 1 untill the 2x3 stage (using + - + -) and flipping the
sign
of the term with [4] in it, or just developing LS (7) by row 1 using the altered pattern. The rule in
general is that the determinant sign stays the same on a signature of "+" and flips on a signature
of "-".
The subspaces in (4) are all assumed right handed. In the case that the terms are a combination
of right handed or left handed we would need another type of signature that does not work the
same
as the metric signature. For a signature of RRRL, (4) would change to:
uxv = & uxv|123 & uxv|124 & uxv|134 & ( -uxv|234 ) (4)
(it seems reasonable by looking at term 1 of (7)). In (3) we may say that the superposition due to
[1]x[3] is negative since right handedness says [1]x[3] points in the -[2] direction. If we considered
the [1]x[3] generated plane as left handed it would have gone to +[2].
Length Condition
The length condition not holding does not disqualify this nD vector product as a candidate for the
generalisation of the cross product since:
any two dimensional hyperplane is defined by three points therefore by two vectors (if we chose
one of the points at the origin of the two vectors), and we may define in 4 dimensions
four 2-hyperplanes by having various restrictions on the vector product of u and v and having
areas:
|[(uxv)|1,2,3]|2 or
|[(uxv)|2,3,4 ]|2 or
|[(uxv)|1,3,4 ]|2 or
|[(uxv)|1,2,4 ]|2
star |& (uxv)|1,2,3 & (uxv)|2,3,4 & (uxv)|1,3,4 & (uxv)|1,2,4 |2 = star |uxv|2 = (d-2) [(u.u)(v.v) - (u.v)2]
(5)
where we specify by "&" the operation of "dimensional superposition". We use this definition
since it holds in any dimension (d). The operator is not the Hodge star and this fomula is proved
By the formula for the angle between two vectors we have four "angles" between any two vectors
in 4D:
etc.
It is clear from (5) and the derivation in 3D that a "compound angle" may exist as:
esterhuysew@telkomsa.net