Properties of Unit Quaternions

In summary, the conversation discusses a property of unit quaternions and its proof in an article by Vernon Chi. The section in question (3.1.3) presents a proof for the property using equations (1) and (2). However, there is confusion about whether the proof also needs to show that (2) implies (1). The conversation also touches on the notation and theory preceding the section and provides further clarification on the interpretation of certain ratios. Finally, the conversation ends with a request for a good source for a detailed analysis of quaternions.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,990
48
I am reading an article by Vernon Chi on quaternions and rotations in 3-space. The title of the article is as follows:View attachment 3979

I am concerned that I do not follow the proof of one of the properties of unit quaternions in Section 3.1.3 of the article.

Section 3.1.3 reads as follows:
View attachment 3980
In the above text we read the following (regarding an important property of unit quaternions):
" ... ... A less obvious, but very useful one (property) is,\(\displaystyle Q_u = R_u cos \phi + P_u sin \phi = cos \phi + P_u sin \phi ... ... ... (1)
\)where \(\displaystyle R_u = (1,0,0,0)\) is a real quaternion and \(\displaystyle P_u = (0, i p_2 , j p_3 , k p_4 )\) is a vector unit quaternion ... ..."


Chi then presents what is meant to be a proof of the property (1) above ... indeed he shows that if (1) is true then \(\displaystyle | Q_u |^2 = 1 \) ... ... ... (2)follows.... ... BUT ... does he not have to show that for the property (1) to be true then we also have to show that if (2) is true then (1) follows ... ... Can someone please clarify this for me ...Further, if it is indeed the case that we need to show (2) implies (1) ... then can someone indicate how we would prove this ...Hope someone can help ...

Peter

To give readers an idea of the notation, definition and theory preceding the above section of Chi's article I am providing Sections 2 to 3.1.2 as follows:View attachment 3981
View attachment 3982
View attachment 3983
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Peter,

$Q_u$ will always be a linear combination of $R_u$ and $P_u$.
That is, the normalized real part respectively the normalized vector part, where the sign of the vector part is as yet unspecified.

Let's say that $Q_u=R_u\cdot a + P_u\cdot b$.
That means that $a$ is the real part of $Q_u$.

The size of $b$ is fully determined by the fact that $|Q_u|=1$.
Similar to what is shown, this means that $b^2=1-a^2$.

If we pick $\phi$ such that $\cos\phi =a$, then it follows that $b=\pm \sin\phi$.
In other words, it seems that Chi was not quite careful with the sign.
Then Chi specifies an interpretation where $\phi$ would be a certain ratio. He's sloppy again, since the ratio he means is actually $\tan\phi$. More precise would be that $\phi$ is the angle between $Q_u$ and the real axis.

Anyway, this interpretation determines the sign. So then it follows that $b=\sin\phi$.
 
  • #3
I like Serena said:
Hi Peter,

$Q_u$ will always be a linear combination of $R_u$ and $P_u$.
That is, the normalized real part respectively the normalized vector part, where the sign of the vector part is as yet unspecified.

Let's say that $Q_u=R_u\cdot a + P_u\cdot b$.
That means that $a$ is the real part of $Q_u$.

The size of $b$ is fully determined by the fact that $|Q_u|=1$.
Similar to what is shown, this means that $b^2=1-a^2$.

If we pick $\phi$ such that $\cos\phi =a$, then it follows that $b=\pm \sin\phi$.
In other words, it seems that Chi was not quite careful with the sign.
Then Chi specifies an interpretation where $\phi$ would be a certain ratio. He's sloppy again, since the ratio he means is actually $\tan\phi$. More precise would be that $\phi$ is the angle between $Q_u$ and the real axis.

Anyway, this interpretation determines the sign. So then it follows that $b=\sin\phi$.
Thanks I Like Serena ... your post is really helpful ...

BTW do you have a good source (online or textbook) for a detailed analysis of quarternions?

Peter
 

1. What is a unit quaternion?

A unit quaternion is a mathematical concept that represents a rotation in three-dimensional space. It is a four-dimensional number with a scalar component and a vector component.

2. What are the properties of unit quaternions?

Unit quaternions have several important properties, including being non-commutative (meaning the order of multiplication matters), having a norm of 1, and being able to represent any 3D rotation in space without gimbal lock. They also have a one-to-one correspondence with rotation matrices.

3. How are unit quaternions used in computer graphics?

Unit quaternions are commonly used in computer graphics for their ability to represent rotations in three-dimensional space. They are also used in animation and game development for efficient and accurate rotation calculations.

4. What is the difference between a unit quaternion and a regular quaternion?

The main difference between a unit quaternion and a regular quaternion is that a unit quaternion has a norm of 1, while a regular quaternion can have any norm. This means that a unit quaternion represents a rotation, while a regular quaternion can represent both rotations and scaling transformations.

5. Can unit quaternions be used to represent translations?

No, unit quaternions cannot represent translations. They can only represent rotations in three-dimensional space. To represent translations, a combination of quaternions and vectors can be used, known as dual quaternions.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
932
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
843
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
426
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
11
Views
960
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
7
Views
815
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
886
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top