Vectors & Matrices Defined Up to Scale

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of vectors and matrices being "defined up to scale," particularly in the context of homogeneous coordinates used in computer vision. This means that vectors or matrices can be multiplied by any nonzero constant without changing their essential properties or the solutions they represent. For example, vectors like <1, 2, 3, 1> and <2, 4, 6, 2> are considered equivalent in this framework. The significance of this concept lies in simplifying representations of geometric entities, where different scalings yield the same geometric interpretation. Understanding homogeneous coordinates is crucial for grasping how these mathematical constructs function in applications like geometric camera models.
gnome
Messages
1,031
Reaction score
1
What does it mean for a matrix or a vector to be "defined up to scale"?

I don't remember ever seeing this expression in my very limited exposure to linear algebra. To put it in context, I'm finding it in a text on computer vision in the section on geometric camera models.
They're talking about using something called homogeneous coordinates to represent points, vectors and planes, and they put the equation of a plane:
ax + by + cz -d = 0
as the dot product of two vectors:
\Pi \cdot P = 0 (Eq. 2.2)
where
\Pi = \left ( \begin{array}{c} a\\ b\\ c\\ -d \end{array} \right ) \; \text{and} \; P = \left ( \begin{array}{c} x\\ y\\ z\\ 1 \end{array} \right )

Anyway, it goes on to say
Note that \Pi is only defined up to scale since multiplying this vector by any nonzero constant does not change the solutions of Eq. 2.2. We use the convention that homogeneous coordinates are only defined up to scale, whether they represent points or planes...
I don't understand what is accomplished by putting the equation in this form, nor do I understand the significance of "defined up to scale". I don't see this terminology anyplace in my (elementary) linear algebra textbook (or I don't know what to look for). Any idea where I can find a clear explanation?


(Why did I write "matrix question" as the title of this thread? I only mentioned vectors, not matrices, in my question, but this section of the text also deals with many matrices that are "only defined up to scale".)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In "homogenous coordinates", two "vectors", where one is a multiple of the other, are considered to be the same vector.

That is, <1, 2, 3, 1> , <2, 4, 6, 2>, and <3, 6, 9, 3> are all different representations of the same (3 dimensional) vector. In terms of ordinary 4 dimensional coordinates, they would, of course, represent vectors having the same direction but different lengths- hence, the three dimensional vector they all represent is "defined up to scale".
 
Thanks HoI. I was looking in all the wrong places. I see there's quite a bit of info on "homogenous coordinates" on the web.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K