1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The Teacher Q&A will be closing soon.

    If you have any information that you would like to keep or refer to in the future please can you copy and paste the information to a format suitable for you to save or take screen shots of the questions and responses you are interested in.

    Don’t forget you can still use the rest of the forums on theTes Community to post questions and get the advice, help and support you require from your peers for all your teaching needs.

    Dismiss Notice

I am right aren't I?

Discussion in 'Mathematics' started by ResourceFinder, Mar 8, 2011.

  1. A question in a paper I was looking at asked for the vector equation of a line through 2 given points

    The mark scheme gives an answer .... not even oe

    So I am right am I not .... there are infinite vector equations for the line going through 2 points

    Also the difference between the 2 points was [2,4,2] so I gave the answer as
    r = [vector] + t[1,2,1] whereas they still used r = [vector] + s[2,4,2] Now, I agree that theirs is one of the infinite available but I am inclined to cancel the "gradient" vector

    Thing is ... it has been ages since I did vectors so I am doubting myself
     
  2. A question in a paper I was looking at asked for the vector equation of a line through 2 given points

    The mark scheme gives an answer .... not even oe

    So I am right am I not .... there are infinite vector equations for the line going through 2 points

    Also the difference between the 2 points was [2,4,2] so I gave the answer as
    r = [vector] + t[1,2,1] whereas they still used r = [vector] + s[2,4,2] Now, I agree that theirs is one of the infinite available but I am inclined to cancel the "gradient" vector

    Thing is ... it has been ages since I did vectors so I am doubting myself
     
  3. DM

    DM New commenter

    Yes you are correct.
     
  4. DM

    DM New commenter

    direction vector might be better terminology than gradient vector
     
  5. Thought so [​IMG]
     
  6. Head suitably hung [​IMG]

    I did use ""
     
  7. DM

    DM New commenter

    I saw that but was just nudging a more suitable word towards you.
     

Share This Page