I Also in 3D, two reflections make a rotation?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter nomadreid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rotation matrices
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
TL;DR Summary
In the plane, two reflections across non-parallel lines make a rotation around the point of intersection of those two lines. But in 3D, do two reflections across non-parallel planes make a rotation around the line of intersection of the two planes?
The easiest proof I know for the 2D statement in the summary does not carry over nicely to the 3D statement since rotations in 3D don't necessarily commute (the 2D proof uses this commuting among rotations in the plane around a common point). Before I then try to modify the proof so that it works, I would like to know whether the statement for 3D is even true. Thanks in advance.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I would refer you to Linear and Geometric Algebra by Alan Macdonald, problem 7.3.9:
7.3.9 (1 rotation ##\equiv ## 2 reflections) a. Show that the composition of two reflections in hyperplanes is a rotation, with the angle of rotation twice the angle between the hyperplanes.
b. Show that a rotation is the composition of two reflections in hyperplanes, with the angle between the hyperplanes half the angle of rotation.

I am not sure how well this matches your question, but I think it does.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Likes nomadreid and Hornbein
Super! It answers my question very well. Thank you, FactChecker!
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top