New location of point after rotation around origin on two axis
$begingroup$
I have looked at another page which explains how to rotate a point around the origin for three axis but I don't understand how you do it for just two axis.link
I would like to rotate a point at (x,y,z) around the origin with a rotation around the X-axis and Y-axis. However I would like to go against the right hand rule and define the z-as as being depth, and x and y being the same as on a 2d coordinate plane. Also as Z goes in, the z value increases.
So, the new coordinate would be (x',y',z')
What will the rotation matrix look like, when there is no rotation on the z axis.
matrices geometry rotations
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have looked at another page which explains how to rotate a point around the origin for three axis but I don't understand how you do it for just two axis.link
I would like to rotate a point at (x,y,z) around the origin with a rotation around the X-axis and Y-axis. However I would like to go against the right hand rule and define the z-as as being depth, and x and y being the same as on a 2d coordinate plane. Also as Z goes in, the z value increases.
So, the new coordinate would be (x',y',z')
What will the rotation matrix look like, when there is no rotation on the z axis.
matrices geometry rotations
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have looked at another page which explains how to rotate a point around the origin for three axis but I don't understand how you do it for just two axis.link
I would like to rotate a point at (x,y,z) around the origin with a rotation around the X-axis and Y-axis. However I would like to go against the right hand rule and define the z-as as being depth, and x and y being the same as on a 2d coordinate plane. Also as Z goes in, the z value increases.
So, the new coordinate would be (x',y',z')
What will the rotation matrix look like, when there is no rotation on the z axis.
matrices geometry rotations
$endgroup$
I have looked at another page which explains how to rotate a point around the origin for three axis but I don't understand how you do it for just two axis.link
I would like to rotate a point at (x,y,z) around the origin with a rotation around the X-axis and Y-axis. However I would like to go against the right hand rule and define the z-as as being depth, and x and y being the same as on a 2d coordinate plane. Also as Z goes in, the z value increases.
So, the new coordinate would be (x',y',z')
What will the rotation matrix look like, when there is no rotation on the z axis.
matrices geometry rotations
matrices geometry rotations
asked Dec 6 '18 at 19:46
Joe ClintonJoe Clinton
314
314
2
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49
2
2
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
An easy way to find what a Transformation does to a set, is to find out what the transformation does to each axis.
Now, let $C={e_1,e_2}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^2$. ($e_i$ is the vector with 1 in the $ith$ position and 0 in the rest)
$C=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\
0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$ would be the representation of this.
Now suppose you want to rotate the whole system about $theta$. The new coordinates of $e_1$ will be: $(costheta,sintheta)$ and given $e_2$ is the orthogonal vector to $e_1$ with both having positive direction, the new coordinates of $e_2$ will be $(-sintheta,costheta)$. (If you have any doubt about how this happens, take a look on the coordinates of a vector over the unitary circumference)
In a more formal way: Let $T:mathbb{R}^2longrightarrowmathbb{R}^2$ the rotation about $theta$, hence:
$[T]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}$,
where $[T]$ is the matrix associated to the transformation T.
Now, a result in Geommetry and Linear Algebra gives us that:
$T(x)=[T][x]$, where $x$ is a vector on the space over where the Transformation is applied.
Therefore, if $x=(x_1,x_2) in mathbb{R}^2$:
$T(x)=[T][x]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} x_1\
x_2
end{pmatrix}$.
Your question is about a generalization of what was said before:
Let $B={e_1,e_2,e_3}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^3$.
$B=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0\
0 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$,
and $S:mathbb{R}^3longrightarrowmathbb{R}^3$ the rotation about $theta$ without $Z$ axis rotating (i.e, rotation only in XY plane), hence:
$[S]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$
and if $y=(y_1,y_2,y_3) in mathbb{R}^3$, then
$S(y)=[S][y]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} y_1\
y_2 \
y_3
end{pmatrix}$.
¿can you deduce why is $[S]$ equal to this now that I've given you the details of how this works in $mathbb{R}^2$?
Hint: think of this as only a rotation in $mathbb{R}^2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3028952%2fnew-location-of-point-after-rotation-around-origin-on-two-axis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
An easy way to find what a Transformation does to a set, is to find out what the transformation does to each axis.
Now, let $C={e_1,e_2}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^2$. ($e_i$ is the vector with 1 in the $ith$ position and 0 in the rest)
$C=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\
0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$ would be the representation of this.
Now suppose you want to rotate the whole system about $theta$. The new coordinates of $e_1$ will be: $(costheta,sintheta)$ and given $e_2$ is the orthogonal vector to $e_1$ with both having positive direction, the new coordinates of $e_2$ will be $(-sintheta,costheta)$. (If you have any doubt about how this happens, take a look on the coordinates of a vector over the unitary circumference)
In a more formal way: Let $T:mathbb{R}^2longrightarrowmathbb{R}^2$ the rotation about $theta$, hence:
$[T]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}$,
where $[T]$ is the matrix associated to the transformation T.
Now, a result in Geommetry and Linear Algebra gives us that:
$T(x)=[T][x]$, where $x$ is a vector on the space over where the Transformation is applied.
Therefore, if $x=(x_1,x_2) in mathbb{R}^2$:
$T(x)=[T][x]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} x_1\
x_2
end{pmatrix}$.
Your question is about a generalization of what was said before:
Let $B={e_1,e_2,e_3}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^3$.
$B=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0\
0 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$,
and $S:mathbb{R}^3longrightarrowmathbb{R}^3$ the rotation about $theta$ without $Z$ axis rotating (i.e, rotation only in XY plane), hence:
$[S]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$
and if $y=(y_1,y_2,y_3) in mathbb{R}^3$, then
$S(y)=[S][y]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} y_1\
y_2 \
y_3
end{pmatrix}$.
¿can you deduce why is $[S]$ equal to this now that I've given you the details of how this works in $mathbb{R}^2$?
Hint: think of this as only a rotation in $mathbb{R}^2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy way to find what a Transformation does to a set, is to find out what the transformation does to each axis.
Now, let $C={e_1,e_2}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^2$. ($e_i$ is the vector with 1 in the $ith$ position and 0 in the rest)
$C=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\
0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$ would be the representation of this.
Now suppose you want to rotate the whole system about $theta$. The new coordinates of $e_1$ will be: $(costheta,sintheta)$ and given $e_2$ is the orthogonal vector to $e_1$ with both having positive direction, the new coordinates of $e_2$ will be $(-sintheta,costheta)$. (If you have any doubt about how this happens, take a look on the coordinates of a vector over the unitary circumference)
In a more formal way: Let $T:mathbb{R}^2longrightarrowmathbb{R}^2$ the rotation about $theta$, hence:
$[T]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}$,
where $[T]$ is the matrix associated to the transformation T.
Now, a result in Geommetry and Linear Algebra gives us that:
$T(x)=[T][x]$, where $x$ is a vector on the space over where the Transformation is applied.
Therefore, if $x=(x_1,x_2) in mathbb{R}^2$:
$T(x)=[T][x]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} x_1\
x_2
end{pmatrix}$.
Your question is about a generalization of what was said before:
Let $B={e_1,e_2,e_3}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^3$.
$B=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0\
0 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$,
and $S:mathbb{R}^3longrightarrowmathbb{R}^3$ the rotation about $theta$ without $Z$ axis rotating (i.e, rotation only in XY plane), hence:
$[S]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$
and if $y=(y_1,y_2,y_3) in mathbb{R}^3$, then
$S(y)=[S][y]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} y_1\
y_2 \
y_3
end{pmatrix}$.
¿can you deduce why is $[S]$ equal to this now that I've given you the details of how this works in $mathbb{R}^2$?
Hint: think of this as only a rotation in $mathbb{R}^2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy way to find what a Transformation does to a set, is to find out what the transformation does to each axis.
Now, let $C={e_1,e_2}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^2$. ($e_i$ is the vector with 1 in the $ith$ position and 0 in the rest)
$C=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\
0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$ would be the representation of this.
Now suppose you want to rotate the whole system about $theta$. The new coordinates of $e_1$ will be: $(costheta,sintheta)$ and given $e_2$ is the orthogonal vector to $e_1$ with both having positive direction, the new coordinates of $e_2$ will be $(-sintheta,costheta)$. (If you have any doubt about how this happens, take a look on the coordinates of a vector over the unitary circumference)
In a more formal way: Let $T:mathbb{R}^2longrightarrowmathbb{R}^2$ the rotation about $theta$, hence:
$[T]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}$,
where $[T]$ is the matrix associated to the transformation T.
Now, a result in Geommetry and Linear Algebra gives us that:
$T(x)=[T][x]$, where $x$ is a vector on the space over where the Transformation is applied.
Therefore, if $x=(x_1,x_2) in mathbb{R}^2$:
$T(x)=[T][x]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} x_1\
x_2
end{pmatrix}$.
Your question is about a generalization of what was said before:
Let $B={e_1,e_2,e_3}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^3$.
$B=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0\
0 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$,
and $S:mathbb{R}^3longrightarrowmathbb{R}^3$ the rotation about $theta$ without $Z$ axis rotating (i.e, rotation only in XY plane), hence:
$[S]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$
and if $y=(y_1,y_2,y_3) in mathbb{R}^3$, then
$S(y)=[S][y]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} y_1\
y_2 \
y_3
end{pmatrix}$.
¿can you deduce why is $[S]$ equal to this now that I've given you the details of how this works in $mathbb{R}^2$?
Hint: think of this as only a rotation in $mathbb{R}^2$.
$endgroup$
An easy way to find what a Transformation does to a set, is to find out what the transformation does to each axis.
Now, let $C={e_1,e_2}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^2$. ($e_i$ is the vector with 1 in the $ith$ position and 0 in the rest)
$C=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\
0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$ would be the representation of this.
Now suppose you want to rotate the whole system about $theta$. The new coordinates of $e_1$ will be: $(costheta,sintheta)$ and given $e_2$ is the orthogonal vector to $e_1$ with both having positive direction, the new coordinates of $e_2$ will be $(-sintheta,costheta)$. (If you have any doubt about how this happens, take a look on the coordinates of a vector over the unitary circumference)
In a more formal way: Let $T:mathbb{R}^2longrightarrowmathbb{R}^2$ the rotation about $theta$, hence:
$[T]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}$,
where $[T]$ is the matrix associated to the transformation T.
Now, a result in Geommetry and Linear Algebra gives us that:
$T(x)=[T][x]$, where $x$ is a vector on the space over where the Transformation is applied.
Therefore, if $x=(x_1,x_2) in mathbb{R}^2$:
$T(x)=[T][x]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta\
sintheta & costheta
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} x_1\
x_2
end{pmatrix}$.
Your question is about a generalization of what was said before:
Let $B={e_1,e_2,e_3}$ be the Canonial Basis for $mathbb{R}^3$.
$B=begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0\
0 & 1 & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$,
and $S:mathbb{R}^3longrightarrowmathbb{R}^3$ the rotation about $theta$ without $Z$ axis rotating (i.e, rotation only in XY plane), hence:
$[S]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}$
and if $y=(y_1,y_2,y_3) in mathbb{R}^3$, then
$S(y)=[S][y]=begin{pmatrix}
costheta & -sintheta & 0\
sintheta & costheta & 0 \
0 & 0 & 1
end{pmatrix}begin{pmatrix} y_1\
y_2 \
y_3
end{pmatrix}$.
¿can you deduce why is $[S]$ equal to this now that I've given you the details of how this works in $mathbb{R}^2$?
Hint: think of this as only a rotation in $mathbb{R}^2$.
edited Dec 6 '18 at 21:28
answered Dec 6 '18 at 20:54
Israel BarquínIsrael Barquín
276
276
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
$begingroup$
Later I'll edit my answer to add how the Matrix of the Transformation would look if the rotation would be done without altering X axis or Y axis. By now, try to induce it on your own. Good luck.
$endgroup$
– Israel Barquín
Dec 6 '18 at 20:56
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3028952%2fnew-location-of-point-after-rotation-around-origin-on-two-axis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
Apply a change of basis to the conventionally constructed rotation matrix.
$endgroup$
– amd
Dec 6 '18 at 20:16
$begingroup$
If you had used the right-hand rule, you could just set $psi$ to zero in the linked question. Does that make sense? Is there any question here other than how to write the matrix when you use the left-hand rule (as you have done) instead of the right-hand rule?
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 6 '18 at 21:49