Symmetry and States of Self Stress in Triangulated Toroidal Frames
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Hardware Support for Non-Photorealistic Rendering
Hardware Support for Non-photorealistic Rendering Ramesh Raskar MERL, Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs (ii) Abstract (i) Special features such as ridges, valleys and silhouettes, of a polygonal scene are usually displayed by explicitly identifying and then rendering ‘edges’ for the corresponding geometry. The candidate edges are identified using the connectivity information, which requires preprocessing of the data. We present a non- obvious but surprisingly simple to implement technique to render such features without connectivity information or preprocessing. (iii) (iv) At the hardware level, based only on the vertices of a given flat polygon, we introduce new polygons, with appropriate color, shape and orientation, so that they eventually appear as special features. 1 INTRODUCTION Figure 1: (i) Silhouettes, (ii) ridges, (iii) valleys and (iv) their combination for a polygonal 3D model rendered by processing Sharp features convey a great deal of information with very few one polygon at a time. strokes. Technical illustrations, engineering CAD diagrams as well as non-photo-realistic rendering techniques exploit these features to enhance the appearance of the underlying graphics usually not supported by rendering APIs or hardware. The models. The most commonly used features are silhouettes, creases rendering hardware is typically more suited to working on a small and intersections. For polygonal meshes, the silhouette edges amount of data at a time. For example, most pipelines accept just consists of visible segments of all edges that connect back-facing a sequence of triangles (or triangle soups) and all the information polygons to front-facing polygons. A crease edge is a ridge if the necessary for rendering is contained in the individual triangles. -
Equivelar Octahedron of Genus 3 in 3-Space
Equivelar octahedron of genus 3 in 3-space Ruslan Mizhaev ([email protected]) Apr. 2020 ABSTRACT . Building up a toroidal polyhedron of genus 3, consisting of 8 nine-sided faces, is given. From the point of view of topology, a polyhedron can be considered as an embedding of a cubic graph with 24 vertices and 36 edges in a surface of genus 3. This polyhedron is a contender for the maximal genus among octahedrons in 3-space. 1. Introduction This solution can be attributed to the problem of determining the maximal genus of polyhedra with the number of faces - . As is known, at least 7 faces are required for a polyhedron of genus = 1 . For cases ≥ 8 , there are currently few examples. If all faces of the toroidal polyhedron are – gons and all vertices are q-valence ( ≥ 3), such polyhedral are called either locally regular or simply equivelar [1]. The characteristics of polyhedra are abbreviated as , ; [1]. 2. Polyhedron {9, 3; 3} V1. The paper considers building up a polyhedron 9, 3; 3 in 3-space. The faces of a polyhedron are non- convex flat 9-gons without self-intersections. The polyhedron is symmetric when rotated through 1804 around the axis (Fig. 3). One of the features of this polyhedron is that any face has two pairs with which it borders two edges. The polyhedron also has a ratio of angles and faces - = − 1. To describe polyhedra with similar characteristics ( = − 1) we use the Euler formula − + = = 2 − 2, where is the Euler characteristic. Since = 3, the equality 3 = 2 holds true. -
Molecular Symmetry
Molecular Symmetry Symmetry helps us understand molecular structure, some chemical properties, and characteristics of physical properties (spectroscopy) – used with group theory to predict vibrational spectra for the identification of molecular shape, and as a tool for understanding electronic structure and bonding. Symmetrical : implies the species possesses a number of indistinguishable configurations. 1 Group Theory : mathematical treatment of symmetry. symmetry operation – an operation performed on an object which leaves it in a configuration that is indistinguishable from, and superimposable on, the original configuration. symmetry elements – the points, lines, or planes to which a symmetry operation is carried out. Element Operation Symbol Identity Identity E Symmetry plane Reflection in the plane σ Inversion center Inversion of a point x,y,z to -x,-y,-z i Proper axis Rotation by (360/n)° Cn 1. Rotation by (360/n)° Improper axis S 2. Reflection in plane perpendicular to rotation axis n Proper axes of rotation (C n) Rotation with respect to a line (axis of rotation). •Cn is a rotation of (360/n)°. •C2 = 180° rotation, C 3 = 120° rotation, C 4 = 90° rotation, C 5 = 72° rotation, C 6 = 60° rotation… •Each rotation brings you to an indistinguishable state from the original. However, rotation by 90° about the same axis does not give back the identical molecule. XeF 4 is square planar. Therefore H 2O does NOT possess It has four different C 2 axes. a C 4 symmetry axis. A C 4 axis out of the page is called the principle axis because it has the largest n . By convention, the principle axis is in the z-direction 2 3 Reflection through a planes of symmetry (mirror plane) If reflection of all parts of a molecule through a plane produced an indistinguishable configuration, the symmetry element is called a mirror plane or plane of symmetry . -
The Cubic Groups
The Cubic Groups Baccalaureate Thesis in Electrical Engineering Author: Supervisor: Sana Zunic Dr. Wolfgang Herfort 0627758 Vienna University of Technology May 13, 2010 Contents 1 Concepts from Algebra 4 1.1 Groups . 4 1.2 Subgroups . 4 1.3 Actions . 5 2 Concepts from Crystallography 6 2.1 Space Groups and their Classification . 6 2.2 Motions in R3 ............................. 8 2.3 Cubic Lattices . 9 2.4 Space Groups with a Cubic Lattice . 10 3 The Octahedral Symmetry Groups 11 3.1 The Elements of O and Oh ..................... 11 3.2 A Presentation of Oh ......................... 14 3.3 The Subgroups of Oh ......................... 14 2 Abstract After introducing basics from (mathematical) crystallography we turn to the description of the octahedral symmetry groups { the symmetry group(s) of a cube. Preface The intention of this account is to provide a description of the octahedral sym- metry groups { symmetry group(s) of the cube. We first give the basic idea (without proofs) of mathematical crystallography, namely that the 219 space groups correspond to the 7 crystal systems. After this we come to describing cubic lattices { such ones that are built from \cubic cells". Finally, among the cubic lattices, we discuss briefly the ones on which O and Oh act. After this we provide lists of the elements and the subgroups of Oh. A presentation of Oh in terms of generators and relations { using the Dynkin diagram B3 is also given. It is our hope that this account is accessible to both { the mathematician and the engineer. The picture on the title page reflects Ha¨uy'sidea of crystal structure [4]. -
A Theory of Nets for Polyhedra and Polytopes Related to Incidence Geometries
Designs, Codes and Cryptography, 10, 115–136 (1997) c 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. Manufactured in The Netherlands. A Theory of Nets for Polyhedra and Polytopes Related to Incidence Geometries SABINE BOUZETTE C. P. 216, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Bd du Triomphe, B-1050 Bruxelles FRANCIS BUEKENHOUT [email protected] C. P. 216, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Bd du Triomphe, B-1050 Bruxelles EDMOND DONY C. P. 216, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Bd du Triomphe, B-1050 Bruxelles ALAIN GOTTCHEINER C. P. 216, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Bd du Triomphe, B-1050 Bruxelles Communicated by: D. Jungnickel Received November 22, 1995; Revised July 26, 1996; Accepted August 13, 1996 Dedicated to Hanfried Lenz on the occasion of his 80th birthday. Abstract. Our purpose is to elaborate a theory of planar nets or unfoldings for polyhedra, its generalization and extension to polytopes and to combinatorial polytopes, in terms of morphisms of geometries and the adjacency graph of facets. Keywords: net, polytope, incidence geometry, prepolytope, category 1. Introduction Planar nets for various polyhedra are familiar both for practical matters and for mathematical education about age 11–14. They are systematised in two directions. The most developed of these consists in the drawing of some net for each polyhedron in a given collection (see for instance [20], [21]). A less developed theme is to enumerate all nets for a given polyhedron, up to some natural equivalence. Little has apparently been done for polytopes in dimensions d 4 (see however [18], [3]). We have found few traces of this subject in the literature and we would be grateful for more references. -
COXETER GROUPS (Unfinished and Comments Are Welcome)
COXETER GROUPS (Unfinished and comments are welcome) Gert Heckman Radboud University Nijmegen [email protected] October 10, 2018 1 2 Contents Preface 4 1 Regular Polytopes 7 1.1 ConvexSets............................ 7 1.2 Examples of Regular Polytopes . 12 1.3 Classification of Regular Polytopes . 16 2 Finite Reflection Groups 21 2.1 NormalizedRootSystems . 21 2.2 The Dihedral Normalized Root System . 24 2.3 TheBasisofSimpleRoots. 25 2.4 The Classification of Elliptic Coxeter Diagrams . 27 2.5 TheCoxeterElement. 35 2.6 A Dihedral Subgroup of W ................... 39 2.7 IntegralRootSystems . 42 2.8 The Poincar´eDodecahedral Space . 46 3 Invariant Theory for Reflection Groups 53 3.1 Polynomial Invariant Theory . 53 3.2 TheChevalleyTheorem . 56 3.3 Exponential Invariant Theory . 60 4 Coxeter Groups 65 4.1 Generators and Relations . 65 4.2 TheTitsTheorem ........................ 69 4.3 The Dual Geometric Representation . 74 4.4 The Classification of Some Coxeter Diagrams . 77 4.5 AffineReflectionGroups. 86 4.6 Crystallography. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92 5 Hyperbolic Reflection Groups 97 5.1 HyperbolicSpace......................... 97 5.2 Hyperbolic Coxeter Groups . 100 5.3 Examples of Hyperbolic Coxeter Diagrams . 108 5.4 Hyperbolic reflection groups . 114 5.5 Lorentzian Lattices . 116 3 6 The Leech Lattice 125 6.1 ModularForms ..........................125 6.2 ATheoremofVenkov . 129 6.3 The Classification of Niemeier Lattices . 132 6.4 The Existence of the Leech Lattice . 133 6.5 ATheoremofConway . 135 6.6 TheCoveringRadiusofΛ . 137 6.7 Uniqueness of the Leech Lattice . 140 4 Preface Finite reflection groups are a central subject in mathematics with a long and rich history. The group of symmetries of a regular m-gon in the plane, that is the convex hull in the complex plane of the mth roots of unity, is the dihedral group of order 2m, which is the simplest example of a reflection Dm group. -
Automatic Workflow for Roof Extraction and Generation of 3D
International Journal of Geo-Information Article Automatic Workflow for Roof Extraction and Generation of 3D CityGML Models from Low-Cost UAV Image-Derived Point Clouds Arnadi Murtiyoso * , Mirza Veriandi, Deni Suwardhi , Budhy Soeksmantono and Agung Budi Harto Remote Sensing and GIS Group, Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), Jalan Ganesha No. 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia; [email protected] (M.V.); [email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (B.S.); [email protected] (A.B.H.) * Correspondence: arnadi_ad@fitb.itb.ac.id Received: 6 November 2020; Accepted: 11 December 2020; Published: 12 December 2020 Abstract: Developments in UAV sensors and platforms in recent decades have stimulated an upsurge in its application for 3D mapping. The relatively low-cost nature of UAVs combined with the use of revolutionary photogrammetric algorithms, such as dense image matching, has made it a strong competitor to aerial lidar mapping. However, in the context of 3D city mapping, further 3D modeling is required to generate 3D city models which is often performed manually using, e.g., photogrammetric stereoplotting. The aim of the paper was to try to implement an algorithmic approach to building point cloud segmentation, from which an automated workflow for the generation of roof planes will also be presented. 3D models of buildings are then created using the roofs’ planes as a base, therefore satisfying the requirements for a Level of Detail (LoD) 2 in the CityGML paradigm. Consequently, the paper attempts to create an automated workflow starting from UAV-derived point clouds to LoD 2-compatible 3D model. -
Chapter 3: Transformations Groups, Orbits, and Spaces of Orbits
Preprint typeset in JHEP style - HYPER VERSION Chapter 3: Transformations Groups, Orbits, And Spaces Of Orbits Gregory W. Moore Abstract: This chapter focuses on of group actions on spaces, group orbits, and spaces of orbits. Then we discuss mathematical symmetric objects of various kinds. May 3, 2019 -TOC- Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Definitions and the stabilizer-orbit theorem 2 2.0.1 The stabilizer-orbit theorem 6 2.1 First examples 7 2.1.1 The Case Of 1 + 1 Dimensions 11 3. Action of a topological group on a topological space 14 3.1 Left and right group actions of G on itself 19 4. Spaces of orbits 20 4.1 Simple examples 21 4.2 Fundamental domains 22 4.3 Algebras and double cosets 28 4.4 Orbifolds 28 4.5 Examples of quotients which are not manifolds 29 4.6 When is the quotient of a manifold by an equivalence relation another man- ifold? 33 5. Isometry groups 34 6. Symmetries of regular objects 36 6.1 Symmetries of polygons in the plane 39 3 6.2 Symmetry groups of some regular solids in R 42 6.3 The symmetry group of a baseball 43 7. The symmetries of the platonic solids 44 7.1 The cube (\hexahedron") and octahedron 45 7.2 Tetrahedron 47 7.3 The icosahedron 48 7.4 No more regular polyhedra 50 7.5 Remarks on the platonic solids 50 7.5.1 Mathematics 51 7.5.2 History of Physics 51 7.5.3 Molecular physics 51 7.5.4 Condensed Matter Physics 52 7.5.5 Mathematical Physics 52 7.5.6 Biology 52 7.5.7 Human culture: Architecture, art, music and sports 53 7.6 Regular polytopes in higher dimensions 53 { 1 { 8. -
A Unified Algorithmic Framework for Multi-Dimensional Scaling
A Unified Algorithmic Framework for Multi-Dimensional Scaling † ‡ Arvind Agarwal∗ Jeff M. Phillips Suresh Venkatasubramanian Abstract In this paper, we propose a unified algorithmic framework for solving many known variants of MDS. Our algorithm is a simple iterative scheme with guaranteed convergence, and is modular; by changing the internals of a single subroutine in the algorithm, we can switch cost functions and target spaces easily. In addition to the formal guarantees of convergence, our algorithms are accurate; in most cases, they converge to better quality solutions than existing methods, in comparable time. We expect that this framework will be useful for a number of MDS variants that have not yet been studied. Our framework extends to embedding high-dimensional points lying on a sphere to points on a lower di- mensional sphere, preserving geodesic distances. As a compliment to this result, we also extend the Johnson- 2 Lindenstrauss Lemma to this spherical setting, where projecting to a random O((1=" ) log n)-dimensional sphere causes "-distortion. 1 Introduction Multidimensional scaling (MDS) [23, 10, 3] is a widely used method for embedding a general distance matrix into a low dimensional Euclidean space, used both as a preprocessing step for many problems, as well as a visualization tool in its own right. MDS has been studied and used in psychology since the 1930s [35, 33, 22] to help visualize and analyze data sets where the only input is a distance matrix. More recently MDS has become a standard dimensionality reduction and embedding technique to manage the complexity of dealing with large high dimensional data sets [8, 9, 31, 6]. -
Crystallography: Symmetry Groups and Group Representations B
EPJ Web of Conferences 22, 00006 (2012) DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/20122200006 C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2012 Crystallography: Symmetry groups and group representations B. Grenier1 and R. Ballou2 1SPSMS, UMR-E 9001, CEA-INAC / UJF-Grenoble, MDN, 38054 Grenoble, France 2Institut Néel, CNRS / UJF, 25 rue des Martyrs, BP. 166, 38042 Grenoble Cedex 9, France Abstract. This lecture is aimed at giving a sufficient background on crystallography, as a reminder to ease the reading of the forthcoming chapters. It more precisely recalls the crystallographic restrictions on the space isometries, enumerates the point groups and the crystal lattices consistent with these, examines the structure of the space group, which gathers all the spatial invariances of a crystal, and describes a few dual notions. It next attempts to familiarize us with the representation analysis of physical states and excitations of crystals. 1. INTRODUCTION Crystallography covers a wide spectrum of investigations: i- it aspires to get an insight into crystallization phenomena and develops methods of crystal growths, which generally pertains to the physics of non linear irreversible processes; ii- it geometrically describes the natural shapes and the internal structures of the crystals, which is carried out most conveniently by borrowing mathematical tools from group theory; iii- it investigates the crystallized matter at the atomic scale by means of diffraction techniques using X-rays, electrons or neutrons, which are interpreted in the dual context of the reciprocal space and transposition therein of the crystal symmetries; iv- it analyzes the imperfections of the crystals, often directly visualized in scanning electron, tunneling or force microscopies, which in some instances find a meaning by handling unfamiliar concepts from homotopy theory; v- it aims at providing means for discerning the influences of the crystal structure on the physical properties of the materials, which requires to make use of mathematical methods from representation theory. -
A Derivation of the 32 Crystallographic Point Groups Using Elementary
American Mineralogist, Volwne 61, pages 145-165, 1976 A derivationof the 32 crystallographicpoint groupsusing elementary group theory MoNrn B. Borsnu.Jn., nNn G. V. Gtsss Virginia PolytechnicInstitute and State Uniuersity Blacksburg,Virginia 2406I Abstract A rigorous derivation of the 32 crystallographic point groups is presented.The derivation is designed for scientistswho wish to gain an appreciation of the group theoretical derivation but who do not wish to master the large number of specializedtopics used in other rigorous group theoreticalderivations. Introduction have appealedto a number of interestingalgorithms basedon various geometricand heuristic arguments This paper has two objectives.The first is the very to obtain the 32 crystallographicpoint groups.In this specificgoal of giving a complete and rigorous deri- paper we present a rigorous derivation of the 32 vation of the 32 crystallographicpoint groups with crystallographicpoint groups that usesonly the most emphasisplaced on making this paper as self-con- elementarynotions of group theory while still taking tained as possible.The second is the more general advantageof the power of the theory of groups. objective of presenting several concepts of modern The derivation given here was inspired by the dis- mathematics and their applicability to the study of cussionsgiven in Klein (1884),Weber (1896),Zas- crystallography.Throughout the paper we have at- senhaus(1949), and Weyl (1952).The mathematical tempted to present as much of the mathematical the- approach usedin their discussionsis a blend of group ory as possible,without resortingto long digressions, theory and the theory of the equivalencerelation' so that the reader with only a modest amount of Each of these mathematical concepts is described mathematical knowledge will be able to appreciate herein and is used in the ways suggestedby these the derivation. -
Geant4 Integration Status
Geant4 integration status ● All CMS shapes integrated: box, tube, trapezoid, cone, polycone, and polyhedra – stress-tested with Geant4 test job FullCMS, a few warnings printed multiple times, ~ all of them coming from polycone or polyhedron special cases. – several fixes uploaded, job still crashes using VecGeom shapes (runs to the end using Geant4 or USolids shapes) ● ...and a few more: Trd, torus2, paraboloid, orb, sphere – integrated, but not stress-tested yet, since not used in FullCMS geant4 test job. G. Lima – GeantV weekly meeting – 2015/10/27 1 During code sprint ● With Sandro, fixed few more bugs with the tube (point near phi- section surface) and polycone (near a ~vertical section) ● Changes in USolids shapes, to inherit from specialized shapes instead of “simple shapes” ● Crashes due to Normal() calculation returning (0,0,0) when fully inside, but at the z-plane between sections z Both sections need to be checked, and several possible section outcomes Q combined → normals added: +z + (-z) = (0,0,0) G. Lima – GeantV weekly meeting – 2015/10/27 2 Geant4 integration status ● What happened since our code sprint? – More exceptions related to Inside/Contains inconsistencies, triggered at Geant4 navigation tests ● outPoint, dir → surfPoint = outPoint + step * dir ● Inside(surfPoint) → kOutside (should be surface) Both sections need to be checked, several possible section outcomes combined, e.g. in+in = in surf + out = surf, etc... P G. Lima – GeantV weekly meeting – 2015/10/27 3 Geant4 integration status ● What happened after our code sprint? – Normal() fix required a similar set of steps → code duplication ● GenericKernelContainsAndInside() ● ConeImplementation::NormalKernel() (vector mode) ● UnplacedCone::Normal() (scalar mode) – First attempt involved Normal (0,0,0) and valid=false for all points away from surface --- unacceptable for navigation – Currently a valid normal is P always provided, BUT it is not always the best one (a performance priority choice) n G.