I am taking a first course in Vector calculus. I am attempting to write a proof for the following theorem.
The proof in the book splits this into two cases -
(i) either the $\vec {AB}$ is parallel to $\vec {CD}$, so $\vec {AB} = k \cdot\vec{CD}$
(ii) $\vec {AB}$ intersects $\vec {CD}$ at some point $P$, so $p=\frac{a+\lambda b}{1+\lambda}=\frac{c+\lambda' d}{1+\lambda'}$
Although I know the section formula, I couldn't come up with the above formulation on my own. The below is my proof. Could someone comment, on whether the proof is elegant, and also acceptable?
Theorem. Four points $A,B,C,D,$ no three of which are collinear, will lie in a plane when and only when there exist four non-zero numbers $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,$ such that
$$\alpha a+ \beta b + \gamma c + \delta d = 0 \\ \alpha + \beta + \gamma + \delta = 0 $$
Proof.
Idea: If the four points are coplanar, we should be able to construct a parallelogram of the diagonal on $\vec{CD}$, with sides as scalar multiples of $\vec {AB}$ and $\vec {CD}$.
Let
$\begin{aligned} \vec {CD} &= \lambda \vec{AB} + \lambda' \vec{BC}\\ (d - c) &= \lambda (b - a) + \lambda'(c - b)\\ d &= -\lambda a + (\lambda - \lambda')b + (1 + \lambda')c \end{aligned}$
We would like the coefficients of $a,b,c$ to be $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ respective.
Set : $-\lambda = \frac{\alpha}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}, 1+\lambda' = \frac{\gamma}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}$. Solving for $\lambda,\lambda'$ we get :
$$\begin{aligned} \lambda' &= -\frac{(\alpha + \beta)}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}\\ \lambda - \lambda' &= \frac{\beta}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma} \end{aligned}$$
So, we have :
$$\begin{aligned} d &= \frac{\alpha}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}a + \frac{\beta}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}b + \frac{\gamma}{\alpha + \beta + \gamma}c \\\\ (\alpha + \beta + \gamma)d &= \alpha a + \beta b + \gamma c \end{aligned}$$
Let $\delta = -(\alpha + \beta + \gamma)$. Thus,
$$ \alpha a + \beta b + \gamma c + \delta d = 0 $$
Further, these constants are non-zero, since $\lambda,\lambda'$ cannot be $0,\infty$.
Don't quite follow this. There is just two cases only if the points are assumed to be coplanar already. Otherwise, it is entirely possible that $AB$ and $CD$ are skew i.e. neither parallel, nor intersecting.
The more direct way, in my opinion, would be to rewrite it in the equivalent form:
This reduces to:
$$ d= \frac{\alpha a+ \beta b + \gamma c}{\alpha+\beta+\gamma} = a + \frac{\beta}{\alpha+\beta+\gamma}(b-a) + \frac{\gamma}{\alpha+\beta+\gamma}(c-a) \\[20px] \iff\quad\quad d-a = \lambda (b-a) + \mu(c-a) $$
The latter means $\vec{AD}$ is a linear combination of $\vec{AB}$ and $\,\vec{AC}\,$, which is the necessary and sufficient condition for the points to be coplanar.