Talk:Euler's theorem (rotation): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Paul Wormer |
imported>Jitse Niesen (→What is a rotation?: clarify what I meant) |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Yes, when '''b''' = '''0''' it is a rotation, provided '''R''' is an orthogonal matrix. When '''R''' = '''E''' it is a pure translation. I thought that "rigid body motion" would not have to be defined. See also [[Rotation matrix]] where I wrote the same (I'm still working on the latter). --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 11:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC) | :Yes, when '''b''' = '''0''' it is a rotation, provided '''R''' is an orthogonal matrix. When '''R''' = '''E''' it is a pure translation. I thought that "rigid body motion" would not have to be defined. See also [[Rotation matrix]] where I wrote the same (I'm still working on the latter). --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 11:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
But there are combinations of rotations and translations that leave points of the body in place. For instance, take | |||
:<math> \bold{x} \mapsto \begin{bmatrix} 0 & -1 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix} \bold{x} + \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} | |||
. </math> | |||
This transformation leaves the point (1/2, 1/2, 0) in place, but it's not a rotation. So I think it's wrong to define a rotation as "a motion of the rigid body that leaves at least one point of the body in place". -- [[User:Jitse Niesen|Jitse Niesen]] 16:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:47, 14 May 2009
What is a rotation?
As I understand the first sentence, a rotation is defined to be "a motion of the rigid body that leaves at least one point of the body in place", but what is a rigid body motion? I think SE(3), i.e., all transformations of the form
with R in SO(3), however that does not seem to be what is meant in the article. -- Jitse Niesen 10:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, when b = 0 it is a rotation, provided R is an orthogonal matrix. When R = E it is a pure translation. I thought that "rigid body motion" would not have to be defined. See also Rotation matrix where I wrote the same (I'm still working on the latter). --Paul Wormer 11:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
But there are combinations of rotations and translations that leave points of the body in place. For instance, take
This transformation leaves the point (1/2, 1/2, 0) in place, but it's not a rotation. So I think it's wrong to define a rotation as "a motion of the rigid body that leaves at least one point of the body in place". -- Jitse Niesen 16:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)