Rotation in 3 dimensions about a point

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of defining rotations in three dimensions about the origin. Participants explore whether an axis of rotation is necessary and the implications of such definitions in both odd and even dimensions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if it is possible to define a rotation about the origin without specifying an axis of rotation, likening it to a phasor in three dimensions.
  • Another participant asserts that every rotation in three dimensions has a fixed axis through the origin, although this may not apply uniquely in higher odd dimensions.
  • A different participant discusses the necessity of translations in relation to the origin of the reference frame when defining rotations, suggesting that no translation is needed if the origin corresponds to the real origin.
  • One participant elaborates on the mathematical properties of rotations, noting that they are distance and orientation preserving transformations, and discusses the implications of eigenvalues in this context.
  • There is a mention of constructing a matrix in even dimensions that preserves orientation and distance but lacks a characteristic root equal to 1, raising questions about the definition of rotations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of an axis of rotation and the implications of rotations in odd versus even dimensions. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the complexity of defining rotations in even dimensions and the potential for matrices that do not conform to traditional definitions of rotation, indicating limitations in the discussion's scope.

tut_einstein
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I was wondering whether it's possible to define a rotation in 3 dimensions about the origin. Is it necessary to define an axis of rotation or would it be legal to say that you rotate abput the origin (like a phasor in 3 dimensions.)

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Every rotation in 3 dimensions leaves a line through the origin unchanged, and we call it the "axis of rotation". It's true in all the higher odd dimensions as well, although in that case there may not be a single uniquely defined axis for a given rotation.

In even dimensions, most rotations do not fix any points (except for the origin, of course).
 
Hey tut_einstein.

Since your origin of the reference frame corresponds to the real origin, no translation is needed. If this wasn't the case you would need to perform two translations before and after your rotation in terms of a linear composition (i.e. matrices to be pre and post multiplied)

For specifics of the rotation, take a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_matrix#Rotation_matrix_from_axis_and_angle
 
a rotation is a specific distance preserving and orientation preserving linear transformation. Thus all its eigenvalues have length one and their product is 1.

In three - space the characteristic polynomial whose roots are the eigenvalues is a cubic with real coefficients. Thus it has at least one real root, either 1 or -1. Either way, the line spanned by the corresponding eigenvector is mapped into itself.

The case of a rotation is the one in which the real eigenvalue is 1, and the other two roots are complex conjugates. The only case when they are also real for a rotation, is an 180 degree rotation where they are both equal to -1. Thus for a rotation, the line spanned by the eigenvector with eigenvalue 1, is not only preserved but fixed pointwise.

If you define a "rotation" simply to mean an orientation preserving, distance preserving, linear map, then it is not hard to write down a matrix in even dimensions, which has orthogonal rows and determinant one, but no characteristic root equal to 1. Try it.

In fact you should be able to make the characteristic polynomial a power of X^2+1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K