Velocity is an indication of a speed, including a direction. It is a vector because that is how a vector is defined (a magnitude, including a direction).
An earthquake is neither a scalar nor a vector. It is an event.
Vector does not lose quality when resized, which is ideal for logos.
A vector
Vector
Given one vector a, any vector that satisfies a.b=0 is orthogonal to it. That is a set of vectors defining a plane orthogonal to the original vector.The set of vectors defines a plane to which the original vector a is the 'normal'.
No, the direct cosines of a vector are unique only up to a sign change. This means that if a set of direct cosines uniquely defines a vector, a set of direct cosines with opposite signs for all components would define the same vector.
Nope
The direction of a vector is defined in terms of its components along a set of orthogonal vectors (the coordinate axes).
To eliminate a vector, you can set its components to zero. This effectively removes the contribution of that vector from any calculations or equations it was involved in.
No. The answer does assume that "components" are defined in the usual sense - that is, a decomposition of the vector along a set of orthogonal axes.
In mathematics, a field is a set with certain operators (such as addition and multiplication) defined on it and where the members of the set have certain properties. In a vector field, each member of this set has a value AND a direction associated with it. In a scalar field, there is only vaue but no direction.
Eigenspace
The cardinality of a set is simply the number of elements in the set. If the set is represented by an STL sequence container (such as std::array, std::vector, std::list or std::set), then the container's size() member function will return the cardinality. For example: std::vector<int> set {2,3,5,7,11,13}; size_t cardinality = set.size(); assert (cardinality == 6);
The single vector which would have the same effect as all of them together
When you resolve a vector, you replace it with two component vectors, usually at right angles to each other. The resultant is a single vector which has the same effect as a set of vectors. In a sense, resolution and resultant are like opposites.
No. The vector resultant of addition of vectors is the vector that would connect the tail of the first vector to the head of the last. For any set of vectors to add to the zero vector, the endpoint of the last vector added must be coincident with the start point of the first. Therefore for the sum of only two vectors to have a chance of being the zero vector, the second vector must be in a direction exactly opposite the first. So you can tell that the result of adding the two vectors could only can be zero vector if the two vectors were of two equal magnitude.