Precision Representation of Vectors Using a Spiral on a Sphere

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter metastable
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vectors
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of vectors in three-dimensional space, specifically exploring whether a vector can be represented with a single value using a spiral superimposed on a sphere. Participants examine the implications of this approach for achieving arbitrary precision and the complexity involved in defining such representations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a vector could be represented by a single value using a spiral on a sphere, with the north pole as 0 and the south pole as 1.
  • Others argue that while theoretically possible, this method would be more complicated than using three values, as it would require additional parameters like the spiral's diameter and radius of the sphere.
  • Concerns are raised about the understandability of such a representation, suggesting that it would obfuscate the actual vector values.
  • Some participants question whether defining vectors in 3D space truly requires three values or if it is merely simpler to conceptualize that way.
  • There is a suggestion that subsequent vectors could potentially be defined with fewer parameters relative to an initial vector, but this is met with skepticism.
  • Participants discuss the implications of scaling the sphere and whether the same percentage value would yield the same vector regardless of the sphere's size.
  • One participant introduces the idea of approximating points in 3D space using a grid system, suggesting alternative methods for representation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the feasibility and practicality of representing vectors with a single value. While some see potential in the spiral method, others firmly believe that at least three values are necessary for accurate representation in three-dimensional space.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity and potential confusion involved in defining vectors using a spiral, including the need for additional parameters that may exceed the simplicity of traditional three-coordinate systems.

  • #31
metastable said:
Does this new convention "avoid reference to elevation?"
Not sure if you still find this relevant, but yes, it would define elevation. It would complete reference to a 3rd dimension after (1st-D) in terms of no. of "orbits" and (2nd-D) in terms of % of distance from NP to SP since I'm assuming that we're still in a sphere of unitary size (r=1). In order to express 3D entirely within the realm of "orbits" it might be a good idea to express the 3rd-D reference in terms of total distance along the "orbits'" path from NP to SP since we would effectively be defining the radius of the sphere beyond r=1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K