MHB Geometric action of an arbitrary orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1

kalish1
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I have a question about describing geometrically the action of an arbitrary orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. I would like to know if my proposed solutions are satisfactory, or if they lack justification. I have two alternate solutions, but have little confidence in their validity. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Solution 1: The orthogonal 3 x 3 matrix with determinant −1 is an improper rotation, meaning it is a reflection combined with a proper rotation. In another sense, an improper rotation is an indirect isometry, which is an affine transformation with an orthogonal matrix with a determinant −1.

Solution 2: A rotation about the origin, followed by inversion through the origin (i.e. (x,y,z)-->(-x,-y,-z) ). Note that a "left-handed object" turns into a "right handed object", so "handedness is reversed" but otherwise it is just like a rotation.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your "solution 1" does not say "rotation about the origin" so "solution 2" is better. Other than that, they both say the same thing.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top