Parametrizing Paths: Learn How to Do It for Functions of Multiple Variables

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nivekious
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parametrizing paths for functions of multiple variables, particularly in the context of curves in R^n. Participants explore various methods and techniques for parameterization, addressing both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on what is meant by parametrizing a path in the context of functions of multiple variables.
  • Another participant describes parametrization as a function that maps an interval to a curve in R^n, suggesting that this is a rough idea of the concept.
  • A different participant questions the appropriateness of interpolation as a technique for parameterizing arbitrary paths.
  • In response, a participant argues that interpolation is not suitable, emphasizing that parameterization involves specifying a one-dimensional object where any point can be identified by a single parameter.
  • This participant also notes that there are infinitely many parameterizations for any given path and outlines methods such as using the function itself as a parameter or employing arclength as a parameter.
  • They further suggest a physical interpretation of parameterization, where an object moves along the path, linking time to the parameter.
  • Additionally, geometric properties are mentioned as a means to derive parametric equations, such as using angles for circular paths.
  • The participant reiterates that there is no single correct parameterization, reinforcing the idea of multiple valid approaches.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the concept that there are multiple valid parameterizations for paths, but there is disagreement regarding the appropriateness of interpolation as a method for parameterization.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the definitions of parameterization and the nature of paths may not be explicitly stated. The discussion also touches on the complexity of determining formulas for parameterization, particularly when involving arclength.

nivekious
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to figure out what is meant by parametrizing a path, and how it would be done for a function of multiple variables. Can someone help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you mean by path a curve C in, say R^n, then "parametrization" usually refers to a function

[tex] \gamma:[a,b]\to\mathbb{R}^n[/tex]

such that [itex]\gamma([a,b])=C[/itex].
This is just the rough idea, does it help?
 
not meant to derail but what are some techniques for parameterizing arbitrary paths? probably interpolation?
 
Since "interpolation" is an approximating method, no it is not at all appropriate for a problem like this.

The whole point of parameterization is that a path, whether in 2 dimensional space or 3 dimensional space, is a one dimensional object. We should be able to specify any point on it by one number.

Another important thing to remember is that there is no single "correct" parameterization for any path- there always exist an infinite number of such parameters.

One fairly useful "method" is this: if y= f(x) is a function of x then we can use x itself as parameter: x= x and y= f(x) or, if you prefer to call your parameter "t", x= t, y= f(t).

It is always possible to use "arclength" as parameter: select some point on the path as t= 0 and one direction as t> 0 (both of those can be done arbitrarily). The (x,y) corresponding to t> 0 is the point at distance t from the point at t=0 in that direction, and the (x,y) corresponding to t< 0 is the point at distance t from the point at t=0 in the opposite direction. Of course, determining formulas for x and y, as functions of t involves doing a (typically) difficult integral to find the arclength itself- I suspect you haven't done that yet.

You can think "physically": imagine an object moving along the path with a given speed. Then (x(t), y(t)) is the point your object is at at time t. That's often done, of course, in Physics.

Finally, you can use some kind of geometric property. I know that, if I measure angle [itex]\theta[/itex] from the positive x axis, the point on a circle of radius R, center at the origin, at angle [itex]\theta[/itex] is given by (Rcos([itex]\theta[/itex]), Rsin([itex]\theta[/itex]) so I can use x= Rcos([itex]\theta[/itex]), y= Rsin([itex]\theta[/itex]) as parametric equations for that circle.

The important thing to remember is that there is no single "correct" parameterization: every path has an infinite number of possible parameterizations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K