Physical Motions and Quaternions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Math 651 Homework 1 - Algebras and Groups Due 2/22/2013
Math 651 Homework 1 - Algebras and Groups Due 2/22/2013 1) Consider the Lie Group SU(2), the group of 2 × 2 complex matrices A T with A A = I and det(A) = 1. The underlying set is z −w jzj2 + jwj2 = 1 (1) w z with the standard S3 topology. The usual basis for su(2) is 0 i 0 −1 i 0 X = Y = Z = (2) i 0 1 0 0 −i (which are each i times the Pauli matrices: X = iσx, etc.). a) Show this is the algebra of purely imaginary quaternions, under the commutator bracket. b) Extend X to a left-invariant field and Y to a right-invariant field, and show by computation that the Lie bracket between them is zero. c) Extending X, Y , Z to global left-invariant vector fields, give SU(2) the metric g(X; X) = g(Y; Y ) = g(Z; Z) = 1 and all other inner products zero. Show this is a bi-invariant metric. d) Pick > 0 and set g(X; X) = 2, leaving g(Y; Y ) = g(Z; Z) = 1. Show this is left-invariant but not bi-invariant. p 2) The realification of an n × n complex matrix A + −1B is its assignment it to the 2n × 2n matrix A −B (3) BA Any n × n quaternionic matrix can be written A + Bk where A and B are complex matrices. Its complexification is the 2n × 2n complex matrix A −B (4) B A a) Show that the realification of complex matrices and complexifica- tion of quaternionic matrices are algebra homomorphisms. -
An Historical Review of the Theoretical Development of Rigid Body Displacements from Rodrigues Parameters to the finite Twist
Mechanism and Machine Theory Mechanism and Machine Theory 41 (2006) 41–52 www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt An historical review of the theoretical development of rigid body displacements from Rodrigues parameters to the finite twist Jian S. Dai * Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Physical Sciences and Engineering, King’s College London, University of London, Strand, London WC2R2LS, UK Received 5 November 2004; received in revised form 30 March 2005; accepted 28 April 2005 Available online 1 July 2005 Abstract The development of the finite twist or the finite screw displacement has attracted much attention in the field of theoretical kinematics and the proposed q-pitch with the tangent of half the rotation angle has dem- onstrated an elegant use in the study of rigid body displacements. This development can be dated back to RodriguesÕ formulae derived in 1840 with Rodrigues parameters resulting from the tangent of half the rota- tion angle being integrated with the components of the rotation axis. This paper traces the work back to the time when Rodrigues parameters were discovered and follows the theoretical development of rigid body displacements from the early 19th century to the late 20th century. The paper reviews the work from Chasles motion to CayleyÕs formula and then to HamiltonÕs quaternions and Rodrigues parameterization and relates the work to Clifford biquaternions and to StudyÕs dual angle proposed in the late 19th century. The review of the work from these mathematicians concentrates on the description and the representation of the displacement and transformation of a rigid body, and on the mathematical formulation and its progress. -
Geometric Algebras for Euclidean Geometry
Geometric algebras for euclidean geometry Charles Gunn Keywords. metric geometry, euclidean geometry, Cayley-Klein construc- tion, dual exterior algebra, projective geometry, degenerate metric, pro- jective geometric algebra, conformal geometric algebra, duality, homo- geneous model, biquaternions, dual quaternions, kinematics, rigid body motion. Abstract. The discussion of how to apply geometric algebra to euclidean n-space has been clouded by a number of conceptual misunderstandings which we first identify and resolve, based on a thorough review of cru- cial but largely forgotten themes from 19th century mathematics. We ∗ then introduce the dual projectivized Clifford algebra P(Rn;0;1) (eu- clidean PGA) as the most promising homogeneous (1-up) candidate for euclidean geometry. We compare euclidean PGA and the popular 2-up model CGA (conformal geometric algebra), restricting attention to flat geometric primitives, and show that on this domain they exhibit the same formal feature set. We thereby establish that euclidean PGA is the smallest structure-preserving euclidean GA. We compare the two algebras in more detail, with respect to a number of practical criteria, including implementation of kinematics and rigid body mechanics. We then extend the comparison to include euclidean sphere primitives. We arXiv:1411.6502v4 [math.GM] 23 May 2016 conclude that euclidean PGA provides a natural transition, both scien- tifically and pedagogically, between vector space models and the more complex and powerful CGA. 1. Introduction Although noneuclidean geometry of various sorts plays a fundamental role in theoretical physics and cosmology, the overwhelming volume of practical science and engineering takes place within classical euclidean space En. For this reason it is of no small interest to establish the best computational model for this space. -
CLIFFORD ALGEBRAS and THEIR REPRESENTATIONS Introduction
CLIFFORD ALGEBRAS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIONS Andrzej Trautman, Uniwersytet Warszawski, Warszawa, Poland Article accepted for publication in the Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics c 2005 Elsevier Science Ltd ! Introduction Introductory and historical remarks Clifford (1878) introduced his ‘geometric algebras’ as a generalization of Grassmann alge- bras, complex numbers and quaternions. Lipschitz (1886) was the first to define groups constructed from ‘Clifford numbers’ and use them to represent rotations in a Euclidean ´ space. E. Cartan discovered representations of the Lie algebras son(C) and son(R), n > 2, that do not lift to representations of the orthogonal groups. In physics, Clifford algebras and spinors appear for the first time in Pauli’s nonrelativistic theory of the ‘magnetic elec- tron’. Dirac (1928), in his work on the relativistic wave equation of the electron, introduced matrices that provide a representation of the Clifford algebra of Minkowski space. Brauer and Weyl (1935) connected the Clifford and Dirac ideas with Cartan’s spinorial represen- tations of Lie algebras; they found, in any number of dimensions, the spinorial, projective representations of the orthogonal groups. Clifford algebras and spinors are implicit in Euclid’s solution of the Pythagorean equation x2 y2 + z2 = 0 which is equivalent to − y x z p = 2 p q (1) −z y + x q ! " ! " # $ so that x = q2 p2, y = p2 + q2, z = 2pq. If the numbers appearing in (1) are real, then − this equation can be interpreted as providing a representation of a vector (x, y, z) R3, null ∈ with respect to a quadratic form of signature (1, 2), as the ‘square’ of a spinor (p, q) R2. -
Relativistic Dynamics
Chapter 4 Relativistic dynamics We have seen in the previous lectures that our relativity postulates suggest that the most efficient (lazy but smart) approach to relativistic physics is in terms of 4-vectors, and that velocities never exceed c in magnitude. In this chapter we will see how this 4-vector approach works for dynamics, i.e., for the interplay between motion and forces. A particle subject to forces will undergo non-inertial motion. According to Newton, there is a simple (3-vector) relation between force and acceleration, f~ = m~a; (4.0.1) where acceleration is the second time derivative of position, d~v d2~x ~a = = : (4.0.2) dt dt2 There is just one problem with these relations | they are wrong! Newtonian dynamics is a good approximation when velocities are very small compared to c, but outside of this regime the relation (4.0.1) is simply incorrect. In particular, these relations are inconsistent with our relativity postu- lates. To see this, it is sufficient to note that Newton's equations (4.0.1) and (4.0.2) predict that a particle subject to a constant force (and initially at rest) will acquire a velocity which can become arbitrarily large, Z t ~ d~v 0 f ~v(t) = 0 dt = t ! 1 as t ! 1 . (4.0.3) 0 dt m This flatly contradicts the prediction of special relativity (and causality) that no signal can propagate faster than c. Our task is to understand how to formulate the dynamics of non-inertial particles in a manner which is consistent with our relativity postulates (and then verify that it matches observation, including in the non-relativistic regime). -
Algebras in Which Every Subalgebra Is Noetherian
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 142, Number 9, September 2014, Pages 2983–2990 S 0002-9939(2014)12052-1 Article electronically published on May 21, 2014 ALGEBRAS IN WHICH EVERY SUBALGEBRA IS NOETHERIAN D. ROGALSKI, S. J. SIERRA, AND J. T. STAFFORD (Communicated by Birge Huisgen-Zimmermann) Abstract. We show that the twisted homogeneous coordinate rings of elliptic curves by infinite order automorphisms have the curious property that every subalgebra is both finitely generated and noetherian. As a consequence, we show that a localisation of a generic Skylanin algebra has the same property. 1. Introduction Throughout this paper k will denote an algebraically closed field and all algebras will be k-algebras. It is not hard to show that if C is a commutative k-algebra with the property that every subalgebra is finitely generated (or noetherian), then C must be of Krull dimension at most one. (See Section 3 for one possible proof.) The aim of this paper is to show that this property holds more generally in the noncommutative universe. Before stating the result we need some notation. Let X be a projective variety ∗ with invertible sheaf M and automorphism σ and write Mn = M⊗σ (M) ···⊗ n−1 ∗ (σ ) (M). Then the twisted homogeneous coordinate ring of X with respect to k M 0 M this data is the -algebra B = B(X, ,σ)= n≥0 H (X, n), under a natu- ral multiplication. This algebra is fundamental to the theory of noncommutative algebraic geometry; see for example [ATV1, St, SV]. In particular, if S is the 3- dimensional Sklyanin algebra, as defined for example in [SV, Example 8.3], then B(E,L,σ)=S/gS for a central element g ∈ S and some invertible sheaf L over an elliptic curve E.WenotethatS is a graded ring that can be regarded as the “co- P2 P2 ordinate ring of a noncommutative ” or as the “coordinate ring of nc”. -
On the Complexification of the Classical Geometries And
On the complexication of the classical geometries and exceptional numb ers April Intro duction The classical groups On R Spn R and GLn C app ear as the isometry groups of sp ecial geome tries on a real vector space In fact the orthogonal group On R represents the linear isomorphisms of arealvector space V of dimension nleaving invariant a p ositive denite and symmetric bilinear form g on V The symplectic group Spn R represents the isometry group of a real vector space of dimension n leaving invariant a nondegenerate skewsymmetric bilinear form on V Finally GLn C represents the linear isomorphisms of a real vector space V of dimension nleaving invariant a complex structure on V ie an endomorphism J V V satisfying J These three geometries On R Spn R and GLn C in GLn Rintersect even pairwise in the unitary group Un C Considering now the relativeversions of these geometries on a real manifold of dimension n leads to the notions of a Riemannian manifold an almostsymplectic manifold and an almostcomplex manifold A symplectic manifold however is an almostsymplectic manifold X ie X is a manifold and is a nondegenerate form on X so that the form is closed Similarly an almostcomplex manifold X J is called complex if the torsion tensor N J vanishes These three geometries intersect in the notion of a Kahler manifold In view of the imp ortance of the complexication of the real Lie groupsfor instance in the structure theory and representation theory of semisimple real Lie groupswe consider here the question on the underlying geometrical -