Can Smooth Curves in 3D Have Cusps?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter inkliing
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    3d Curves Smooth
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of smooth curves in three-dimensional space, specifically addressing whether such curves can have cusps. Participants explore the implications of differentiating curves that exhibit cusps and the conditions under which a curve is considered smooth.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the curve (1+t^2, t^2, t^3) has a cusp at (1,0,0) but also has a smooth derivative, raising questions about the nature of smoothness and cusps.
  • Another participant argues that differentiation turning cusps into discontinuities only applies to cusps with a non-zero angle, suggesting that a cusp with a zero angle may be an illusion.
  • A third participant points out that the cusp occurs at t=0 where the derivative is (0, 0, 0), indicating that this may not be a proper parameterization of the curve.
  • One participant emphasizes that to avoid "smooth" cusps, the condition R'(t) ≠ 0 must be met, linking smoothness to the continuous non-zero derivative of a parametric curve.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of cusps and smoothness, with no consensus reached on whether smooth curves can have cusps or the implications of differentiating such curves.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of parameterization and the conditions under which curves are considered smooth, highlighting the dependence on definitions and the nuances of differentiability.

inkliing
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
"smooth" curves with cusps in 3d

While reviewing basic calculus, I noticed that the curve (1+t^2,t^2,t^3), which clearly has a cusp at (1,0,0), has a derivative curve (2t,2t,3t^2) which is clearly smooth. This struck me as odd since differentiation usually seems to turn cusps into discontinuities, whereas integration smoothes out a curve, especially a curve described by polynomials. In fact, in general I have always taken a curve to be smooth iff it has a continuous derivative, which this curve has, and yet a cusp cannot be smooth in any sensible sense. I suspect the explanation is relatively simple - just something I'm missing.

Thx in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi inkliing! :smile:
inkliing said:
… differentiation usually seems to turn cusps into discontinuities …

no, that's only for cusps that have a non-zero angle

a cusp with a zero angle is often an illusion

consider a point on the wheel of a steadily moving car …

in the frame of reference of the car, it's going in a uniform circle (you can't get any smoother than that!), with https://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=27" of constant magnitude v2/r

but in the frame of reference of the ground, it follows a cycloid (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycloid" for a neat .gif), with a cusp whenever that point contacts the ground …

it moves vertically down just before contact, and vertically up just after …

but it still obviously has acceleration of constant magnitude v2/r :wink:

(can you find a frame of reference in which your curve has no cusp? :biggrin:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Note also that your "cusp" is at t= 0 where the derivative is (0, 0, 0) so that is NOT a proper parameterization of the curve.
 


Thx tiny tim for the very straightforward frame-of-reference refrence. I understand it much better now :)
 


inkliing said:
While reviewing basic calculus, I noticed that the curve (1+t^2,t^2,t^3), which clearly has a cusp at (1,0,0), has a derivative curve (2t,2t,3t^2) which is clearly smooth. This struck me as odd since differentiation usually seems to turn cusps into discontinuities, whereas integration smoothes out a curve, especially a curve described by polynomials. In fact, in general I have always taken a curve to be smooth iff it has a continuous derivative, which this curve has, and yet a cusp cannot be smooth in any sensible sense. I suspect the explanation is relatively simple - just something I'm missing.

Thx in advance.

The condition you need to avoid such "smooth" cusps is that R'(t) ≠ 0. If think of an object moving, if you allow it to smoothly come to a stop then smoothly take off in a different direction, you can get sharp corners. But if you have a continuous non-zero derivative for R(t), that can't happen, and that is the definition of a smooth parametric curve.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K