Symmetry Operations of a Cube: Geometric Descriptions and Matrix Representations

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cube Symmetries
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the symmetry operations of a cube, specifically using geometric descriptions and matrix representations. The set of vertices for the cube is defined as \( W = \{(x, y, z) \in \mathbb{R}^3 \mid x, y, z \in \{-1, 1\}\} \). Symmetries are represented by matrices \( d \) and \( s \), which are orthogonal and thus isometries, confirming that they map cube vertices to themselves. The discussion also explores the classification of these symmetries as rotations and reflections, with specific angles and axes of rotation detailed.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix operations and transformations
  • Familiarity with orthogonal matrices and isometries
  • Knowledge of eigenvalues and eigenvectors
  • Basic concepts of geometric transformations in three-dimensional space
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of orthogonal matrices in linear algebra
  • Learn about eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the context of rotation matrices
  • Explore geometric interpretations of matrix transformations
  • Investigate the classification of symmetries in three-dimensional objects
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physics students, and anyone interested in geometric transformations and symmetry operations in three-dimensional space.

  • #31
Klaas van Aarsen said:
The vector $v$ is fine.
The problem is that we have 2 possible choices for $v'$ and we need to pick the right one.
That is, the one such that $v\times v'$ is in the same direction as $u$. 🤔

Taking $v'=\left (0, 1, 1\right )$ we have the following:

We have the vector $w=u\times v=(1,1,-1)\times (-1,0,-1)=(-1,2,1)$ and we get $\displaystyle{w'=\|w\|\frac{u\times v'}{\|u\times v'\|}=\sqrt{6}\frac{(1,1,-1)\times (0, 1, 1)}{\|(1,1,-1)\times (0, 1, 1)\|}=\sqrt{6}\frac{(2,-1,1)}{\sqrt{6}}=(2,-1,1)}$.

The condition is now satisfied, isn't it? We have $w\cdot v'=3$.

So we get the matrix \begin{equation*}\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & -1 \\ -1 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\end{equation*}

:unsure:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
mathmari said:
The condition is now satisfied, isn't it? We have $w\cdot v'=3$.

So we get the matrix \begin{equation*}\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & -1 \\ -1 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}\end{equation*}
Yep. All correct. (Nod)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K