Finding the Metric in Stereographic Projection

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the metric in X,Y coordinates resulting from the stereographic projection from the 2-sphere to the 2-dimensional plane. Participants explore various approaches, including the use of spherical coordinates and transformations between coordinate systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the method to find the metric in X,Y coordinates after applying stereographic projection.
  • Another suggests starting with spherical coordinates and mentions a simplification involving the sine and cosine functions.
  • A participant proposes that the Riemannian metric is relevant and discusses using the stereographic projection to pull back a 2-form.
  • One participant describes their parametrization of the sphere and the transformation to the XY plane, leading to a proposed expression for the metric.
  • Another participant provides a simplification for the sine over cosine expression, clarifying its relation to cotangent.
  • There is a suggestion to change one of the coordinates based on the geometrical definition of cotangent, which may simplify the problem.
  • A participant reflects on their earlier misunderstanding and acknowledges the connection between cotangent and stereographic projection.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various methods and approaches to the problem, but there is no consensus on a single correct method or outcome. The discussion remains exploratory with multiple perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the necessity of using spherical coordinates to parametrize a 2-dimensional surface, highlighting the complexity of working with three-dimensional coordinates under constraints.

mnb96
Messages
711
Reaction score
5
Hello,
if we consider the stereographic projection \mathcal{S}^2\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 given in the form:

(X,Y) = \left( \frac{x}{1-z} , \frac{y}{1-z} \right)

how can I find the metric in X,Y coordinates?

-- Should I first express the projection in spherical coordinates, then find the inverse projection \mathbb{R}^2\rightarrow \mathcal{S}^2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hello mnb96! :smile:

start with spherical coordinates, and use a simplification for sin/(1 - cos) :wink:
 
I think they may be referring to the Riemannian metric. If this is so, then
the R-metric is a 2-form, so you just need to use the stereo projection
to pullback a 2-form.
 
oK, thanks to you both.
I tried the following:

I parametrized the S^2 sphere with coordinates (\theta,\phi), then I wrote down the transformation from the S^2 sphere (with spherical coordinates) to the XY plane (with polar coordinates):

R = \frac{\sin\theta}{1-\cos\theta}

\alpha = \phi

Then I simply used the polar->cartesian transformation to obtain:

X(\theta,\phi) = \frac{\sin\theta \cos\phi}{1-\cos\theta}

Y(\theta,\phi) = \frac{\sin\theta \sin\phi}{1-\cos\theta}

At this point I was ready to compute the metric as:

ds^2 = dX^2 + dY^2 = \frac{1}{(1-\cos\theta)^2} \left( d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta \cdot d\phi^2 \right)

Was this correct?
@tiny-tim: I don't know what you meant by simplification for sin(x)/(1-cos(x))
 
sinx/(1 - cosx) = 2sin(x/2)cos(x/2) / 2sin2(x/2) = cot(x/2) :wink:
 
tiny-tim said:
sinx/(1 - cosx) = 2sin(x/2)cos(x/2)/2sin2(x/2) = cot(x/2) :wink:

Ah, you meant that! :redface:
Thanks!

-- However, the end of the story was that we were forced to use spherical coordinates because we needed to parametrize a 2-dimensional surface with two parameters, and not three-parameters x,y,z plus a quadratic constraint.
 
(have a theta: θ and a phi: φ :wink:)

i think you're missing the obvious …

using coordinates θ and φ, you already have X = cot(θ/2)cosφ, Y = cot(θ/2)sinφ …

so change one of the coordinates again! :smile:
 
tiny-tim said:
(have a theta: θ and a phi: φ :wink:)

i think you're missing the obvious …

using coordinates θ and φ, you already have X = cot(θ/2)cosφ, Y = cot(θ/2)sinφ …

so change one of the coordinates again! :smile:


Uhm...ah yes! maybe I got what you were trying to tell me :)
Darn, you were just suggesting me to use the geometrical definition of 'cotangent'. This way everything becomes almost trivial.

Actually now that I think about it, the cotangent operator itself does a stereographic projection of the 1-sphere onto the real line. Stupid me.

I think I missed it because I tried to directly work on the stereographic projection for the n-sphere.
 
he he! :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K