What are the general equations of geodesics on a cylinder's surface?

In summary, the conversation discusses finding a general equation for geodesics on a cylinder's surface, the name of these curves (which could possibly be helices), and the possibility of identifying geodesics on two surfaces with equal Gaussian curvature. It is noted that for a cylinder with zero curvature, the geodesics correspond to straight lines on a flat plane. However, for surfaces with non-zero curvature, the association may not hold. The conversation also touches on the simplicity of this problem and the technicalities that may affect the solution.
  • #1
tehno
375
0
Find a general equation of geodesics on cylinder's surface.
What's the name of these curves?
:cool:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
just a guess, cycloids? or if they are unnamed we can call them "tehnos"!
 
  • #3
They are not cycloids mathwonk.Funny thing :the tehnicians of various fields are familar with them.The things shaped that way have interesting properties and important applications.
 
  • #4
circular helixes?

A general param would be...

[tex]\gamma(t) = (a\cos(ct),a\sin(ct),bt)[/tex]

up to a rigid motion
 
Last edited:
  • #5
quasar987 said:
circular helixes?

A general param would be...

[tex]\gamma(t) = (a\cos(ct),a\sin(ct),bt)[/tex]

up to a rigid motion

Yes, because a cylinder is flat!
 
  • #6
George Jones said:
Yes, because a cylinder is flat!
For a given value of "flat"

[tex]\kappa_1 \kappa_2 = 0[/tex] to be exact.

Edit:
As a minor point of interest, if one considers that the gauusian curvature of the cylinder is zero, and thus that we can form a cylinder from a flat plane, then straight lines on the plane, become helixs on the cylinder.

But is it true that all geodesics are isomorphic under an isometry of this kind. If the gaussian curvature between two surface is equal, can we identify geodesics on one surface with those on the other?
 
Last edited:
  • #7
ObsessiveMathsFreak said:
But is it true that all geodesics are isomorphic under an isometry of this kind. If the gaussian curvature between two surface is equal, can we identify geodesics on one surface with those on the other?

Well, the simply-connected cover of both surfaces is the plane and each geodesic of a given surface is the image of a line in the plane under the covering map. So, I think the answer is, yes (sort of): given a geodesic on one surface, we look at its inverse image in R^2. This will be a family of lines (maybe infinite, maybe not). Then take the geodesics in the second surface corresponding to those lines.

So, we can associate a family of geodesics of one surface for every geodesic of the other.
 
  • #8
i think i was thinking of helices. i gues cycloids are those curves you get when you mark a point on a penny and roll it right?
 
  • #9
it is a pretty easy problem since all you have to do is unroll the cylinder to a rectangle.
 
  • #10
Doodle Bob said:
So, I think the answer is, yes (sort of): given a geodesic on one surface, we look at its inverse image in R^2.
But, what about surfaces with non zero curvature?
 
  • #11
ObsessiveMathsFreak said:
But, what about surfaces with non zero curvature?

Yeah, I guess you could do the same procedure for the non-zero curvature as long as its constant.

For constant negative Gaussian curv., the simply-connected cover would be the hyperbolic plane. For positive, it would be the 2-sphere.

of course, I'm assuming the two surfaces have the same curvature *and* that there isn't anything too aberrant about either's topology, i.e. both are connected and complete (when unioned with its boundary) etc. etc.
 
  • #12
mathwonk said:
it is a pretty easy problem since all you have to do is unroll the cylinder to a rectangle.

That's why I classified the problem under "easy".
Helices ,as quasar987 said, is the correct answer.:smile:
 

What makes something "easy but interesting"?

Something can be considered "easy but interesting" if it is not overly complicated or difficult to understand, but still captures the attention and curiosity of the person learning or experiencing it.

Can something be both easy and interesting at the same time?

Yes, something can definitely be both easy and interesting. In fact, many things that are easy to understand can also be quite fascinating and thought-provoking.

Why is it important to have easy but interesting things in science?

Having easy but interesting things in science can help make complex concepts more accessible and engaging for a wider audience. It can also help to spark curiosity and interest in science for those who may think it is too difficult or boring.

What are some examples of easy but interesting scientific topics?

Examples of easy but interesting scientific topics could include introductory concepts in biology, such as the basics of genetics or the human body, or basic principles of chemistry, such as the periodic table or chemical reactions.

How can scientists make their research more accessible to the general public?

Scientists can make their research more accessible to the general public by using clear and simple language, providing visual aids and examples, and engaging with the public through various platforms such as social media or public lectures.

Similar threads

  • Differential Geometry
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
31
Views
793
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top