My geometry book asks me to distinguish the two terms. First, though, I noted that you cannot have a half of a line becuase lines stretch indefinitely, isn't that correct? If so, did they possible mean segment? Because in that case, the half of a line segment would be a midpoint, and therein would the lie the distinction, that the midpoint is not a vertex. Am i mistaken, or missing anything? Or are my thoughts utterly wrong?
I always thought a ray had no endpoint (just a point, and a direction), therefore a half-line and a ray are two functionally equivalent terms. I might be wrong but then everything I find online seems to support this definition of a ray
How so? A vector has no position (origin) whereas a ray does. That would be the distinction between the two.You have confused a vector with a ray.
No I haven't, I'll have a look.Have you ever studied Axiomatic Geometry ?
The foundations of modern geometry are due to David Hilbert, G.H. Moore, & R.L. Moore.
You have a problem with mathematical vocabulary don't you?
A vector is a scientific concept. A vector has length and direction.
That is not a mathematical concept. Direction is not mathematical.
On the other hand, axiomatic geometry is purely synthetic.
If are two points then
You don't have to become aggressive and condescending.You have a problem with mathematical vocabulary don't you?
What I meant is that a vector is that, a vector, whereas a ray is defined by a point and a vector (which would represent its "direction"). So a ray cannot be equivalent to a vector, thus my question of why I would have confused the notion of a ray and a vector.A vector is a scientific concept. A vector has length and direction.
That is not a mathematical concept. Direction is not mathematical.