Read · 1 min

One approach to defining lines algebraically is via "slopes" (basically directions), but that doesn't extend well to higher dimensions.

The better approach is actually in terms of orthogonality.

Parametrically, a line takes the form {(a+tu,b+tv)}\{(a+tu,b+tv)\} over reals tt. The line goes in the nonzero direction ±(u,v)\pm(u,v).

So the (tu,tv)(tu,tv) component is orthogonal to the direction (−v,u)(-v,u). Thus our line is alternatively described as the set of (x,y)(x,y) such that −v(x−a)+u(y−b)=0-v(x-a)+ u(y-b) = 0: the set of (x,y)(x,y) such that (x−a,y−b)(x-a,y-b) is orthogonal to (−v,u)(-v,u) (because being orthogonal to (−v,u)(-v,u) is equivalent to having direction ±(u,v)\pm(u,v)).

Cleaning up constants, let A=−vA = -v, B=uB = u, and C=va−ubC = va-ub. Then the line here is simply the set of (x,y)(x,y) satisfying Ax+By+C=0Ax+By+C = 0.

Conversely, for any constants A,B,CA,B,C with A,BA,B not both zero (why does this matter?), it's easy to see that Ax+By+C=0Ax+By+C = 0 defines a line. (Why?)

Type a concept, like “slope” or “photosynthesis”.

↑ ↓ to choose · Enter to openSearch explanations and problems