Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [EMHL] Re: Affine triangles

Expand Messages
  • Francois Rideau
    Dear Vladimir Thanks with your beautiful solution. But why using an extra-space? Keeping your notations and calling the signed area of the triple
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 7, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Vladimir
      Thanks with your beautiful solution.
      But why using an extra-space?
      Keeping your notations and calling <M,N,P> the signed area of the triple
      (M,N,P), it's just enough to see that the map:
      (M,N,P) --> <M,N,P> is tri-affine alternate just as a determinant function
      is multilinear alternate.
      The main problem is how to define the signed area without leaving the plane!
      Here the way I prefer:
      We suppose we have an orientation of the plane, in fact an orientation in
      the euclidian vector space associated to the euclidian affine space.
      If h and k are two vectors, I note [h,k] the mixed product of these 2
      vectors, that is the 2x2 determinant of their components in a direct
      orthonormal basis, it's easy to see that this definition don't depend on the
      choice of the direct orthonormal basis.
      Then for any point O in the plane, I define <M,N,P> by the formula:
      <M,N,P> = (1/2)( [Vec(OM),Vec(ON)] + [Vec(ON),Vec(OP)] + [Vec(OP), Vec(OM)]
      )
      First, it's easy to see that the expression in the second member don't
      depend on point O and next that the map (M,N,P) --> <M,N,P> is tri-affine
      alternate.
      That's the way Hadamard defines signed area in his famous book of
      Geometry.In fact he don't speak about vector space and mixed product but the
      idea was behind.
      If f is the affine map sending M on M', N on N', P on P' and calling g =
      Vec(f) the linear map associated to the affine map f, we have:
      1°<M',N',P'> = det(g) <M,N,P>
      2) <M',N,P> + <M,N',P> + <M,N,P'> = Trace(g) <M,N,P>
      It's also easy to define the signed area of an n-gon by:
      <A_1, ...,A_n> = (1/2)( [Vec(OA_1),Vec(OA_2] + [Vec(OA_2,Vec(OA_3)] + ... +
      [Vec(OA_n),Vec(OA_1)])
      and so one.
      Reading anglo-saxon books on Geometry, I note they don't like using signed
      objects like signed angle of lines or vectors or signed area. I don't
      understand why!
      In France we do but in fact the situation is more tragic for our teachers
      "in general" know nothing in Geometry. In their cursus, emphasis is put on
      linear and polynomial algebras so here we get teachers computing very well
      the Jordan decomposition of a matrix and for the best the Galois group of a
      polynomial but unable to use signed angles not to speak of the signed area
      unknown by the crowd (inconnu au bataillon) or to compose two direct
      similarity maps in the plane. That's why my fellow countrymen are just able
      reading road-signposts that they come near a roundabout when they are not
      too drunk!
      What is the situation near the Neva river?
      Going back to my affine congiguration, we note that 1 is not a root of the
      characteristic polynomial: X^2 + X + 1/4 of Vec(f) so we know that f has an
      unique fixed point O and as Vec(f) is not diagonalizable then f has an
      unique invariant line. It's easy to see that this invariant line is just the
      A'B'C' line and O is somewhere on it!
      I leave you find a way to construct O.
      For those who are interested, I can send a Cabri picture or a scanned image
      of this picture as well.
      Friendly
      François


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Francois Rideau
      ... Dear Vladimir Again I saw an interesting little typo in my last mail. Of course , we must read: 2° +
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 8, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On 1/8/06, Francois Rideau <francois.rideau@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > 1°<M',N',P'> = det(g) <M,N,P>
        > 2) <M',N,P> + <M,N',P> + <M,N,P'> = Trace(g) <M,N,P>
        > It's also easy to define the signed area of an n-gon by:
        > <A_1, ...,A_n> = (1/2)( [Vec(OA_1),Vec(OA_2] + [Vec(OA_2,Vec(OA_3)] + ...
        > + [Vec(OA_n),Vec(OA_1)])
        > and so one.
        >
        Dear Vladimir
        Again I saw an interesting little typo in my last mail.
        Of course , we must read:
        2°<M',N,P> + <M,N',P> + <M,N,P'> = (Trace(g) +1) <M,N,P>
        I just mixed up with the same trace formula in vector space. Why that extra
        " + 1 ", you would tell me? It's just the "hidden" extra-space! Here we call
        it the vector extension of the affine space (defined up to isomorphism).
        Your solution uses a dropped version of that extra-space. But no matter the
        way we define it, the result is the same!
        If f is an affine map with g as associated vector map, f has an unique
        vector extension h in the vector extension of the affine space and calling
        P_h and P_g the characteristic polynomials of g and h, we have the formula:
        P_h = (X-1)P_g.
        In particular, we have:
        1°Det(h) = Det(g)
        2°Trace(h) = Trace(g) +1
        That explains my formulas in the affine plane. The relation between minimum
        polynomials of g and h is more elaborate!
        Maybe that explains too why there is no longer geometry teaching in France!
        The Jordan decomposition of the vector map h is translated in an "affine
        decomposition" of the affine map f. But here we are so "bourbakist", we
        prefer computing Jordan decomposition in abstracto just to keep us happy,
        forgetting the geometrical applications and they begin in dimension 2 as we
        saw it in this little problem.
        Friendly
        François


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.