Rotate Nodes Around x & z-Axis: Second Opinion Needed

laminatedevildoll
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
I had to rotate four nodes x,y,z around the z-axis, then the x-axis using rotation equations and an angle. The whole point of the program is to change the input data into a new coordinate system. I think that my data looks right, but I need a second opinion.

Input

x | y | z

1.| 0.00 | 0.00 | -2.00
2.| -10.00 | 0.00 | -2.00
3.| 0.00 | 5.00 | -2.00
4.| -10.00 | 5.00 | -2.00

Output

-10.0000 -0.742781 -1.85695
0.00000 -0.742781 -1.85695
-10.000 4.64238 -1.85695
0.00000 4.64238 -1.85695
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I am not an expert on this, but as I try to visualize:

On the room floor, the X axis runs W-E, Y axis runs S-N. Z axis runs floor-ceiling.

Your 1st node is located on the Z axis 2 inches below the origin. You first rotate it around the Z axis, and it stays where it is. You then rotate it around the X axis, shouldn't its new coordinates be (0,0,+2)?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top