Talk:Geometric algebra: Difference between revisions
→A possible source of confusion
Line 103:
::::::::::::::And as I understand it, a is a scalar or can be a scalar, and i, j and k are values which can be used in the context of b and/or c. Do you really disagree? If so, why?
::::::::::::::That said, scalar product itself has two relevant meanings in this discussion - a product between vectors which produces a scalar, and a product between a scalar and a vector which produces another vector. But even there, it's my understanding that a vector space only needs to support the ability to be scaled and added. Once you have that you have enough that you can easily define a mechanism which multiplies vectors and produces a scalar. That said, you have already defined product involving i, j and k which produces a scalar - that particular product doesn't make them orthonormal, but it would be easy enough to define another product which does. <code>-mul</code>, for example. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 02:49, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
::::::::::::::After thinking about this, I am going to ask you to change your "It is known" statements in the task description. You need to spell these out in more detail. You cannot expect these details to be known by typical contributors to Rosettacode. You cannot even expect these details to be known by typical mathematicians. Only people who are well versed in the geometri/clifford algebra arcana should be expected to have apriori understanding of those details. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 03:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
== "Orthonormal basis" ==
| |||