News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Pixel Is Not A Little Square (1995) [pdf] by mort96 on Saturday July 27, 2019 @03:30AM (#20540855)
There's also the case that there's a bunch of vectors you _can't_ represent as tuples of numbers. A vector with orientation but a magnitude of 0 is a completely valid vector afaik, and you could do things with it like normalizing it to get a unit vector of the same orientation, and it's not representable as a tuple.

The tuple model is extremely useful, but incomplete.

Re:A Pixel Is Not A Little Square (1995) [pdf] by nonanonymous on Saturday July 27, 2019 @10:15AM (#20542124)
Vectors with different orientation but the same magnitude are the same vector (the zero vector.) Observe that if you add a zero magnitude vector and a unit vector, the result is just the same unit vector. It follows that the normalization scheme you described can't be a function on vectors (since you can "normalize" two equal vectors but get two different results.)
Re:A Pixel Is Not A Little Square (1995) [pdf] by taejo on Saturday July 27, 2019 @12:17PM (#20542677)
> A vector with orientation but a magnitude of 0 is a completely valid vector afaik

Not by the mathematicians' definition. Maybe somewhere in physics such objects are useful, but if you formalized them you'd get something other than a vector space.