Find all invariant lines of an affine transformation in plane
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have affine transformation:
$$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$
How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?
Thanks in advance
linear-transformations affine-geometry
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have affine transformation:
$$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$
How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?
Thanks in advance
linear-transformations affine-geometry
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have affine transformation:
$$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$
How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?
Thanks in advance
linear-transformations affine-geometry
Suppose we have affine transformation:
$$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$
How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?
Thanks in advance
linear-transformations affine-geometry
linear-transformations affine-geometry
edited Nov 24 at 16:24
Andrei
10.4k21025
10.4k21025
asked Nov 24 at 16:19
ziadxkabakibi
11
11
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as
$$
p = p_0 + lambda vec v
$$
then
$$
p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
$$
or
$$
A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
$$
so we have
$$
(A-I_2)vec v = 0\
(A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
$$
now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.
Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$
The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$
answered Nov 24 at 16:30
Andrei
10.4k21025
10.4k21025
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
|
show 1 more comment
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:20
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:37
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:39
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
– Andrei
Nov 24 at 22:41
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
– amd
Nov 24 at 22:46
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as
$$
p = p_0 + lambda vec v
$$
then
$$
p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
$$
or
$$
A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
$$
so we have
$$
(A-I_2)vec v = 0\
(A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
$$
now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as
$$
p = p_0 + lambda vec v
$$
then
$$
p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
$$
or
$$
A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
$$
so we have
$$
(A-I_2)vec v = 0\
(A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
$$
now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as
$$
p = p_0 + lambda vec v
$$
then
$$
p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
$$
or
$$
A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
$$
so we have
$$
(A-I_2)vec v = 0\
(A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
$$
now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.
Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as
$$
p = p_0 + lambda vec v
$$
then
$$
p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
$$
or
$$
A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
$$
so we have
$$
(A-I_2)vec v = 0\
(A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
$$
now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.
edited Nov 24 at 18:43
answered Nov 24 at 18:35
Cesareo
7,5203516
7,5203516
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.
Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.
Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.
Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.
Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.
Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.
edited Nov 24 at 22:59
answered Nov 24 at 22:29
amd
28.8k21049
28.8k21049
add a comment |
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
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%2f3011744%2ffind-all-invariant-lines-of-an-affine-transformation-in-plane%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