Sum of vectors and the effect of applying rotation and scale factors












0












$begingroup$


I have a set of vectors $mathbf{V} = [mathbf{v}_{1} cdots mathbf{v}_{M}] in mathbb{R}^{N times M}$. The sum of these vectors will form another vector $mathbf{w} in mathbb{R}^{N}$, as is already known.



Now, say that for each $mathbf{v}_{m}$, I apply a scaling and rotation factor $alpha_{m}$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} in mathbb{R}^{N times N}$, the sum will give me a vector $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ which is possibly different from $mathbf{w}$.



I don't know how to prove it (hence the question), but from some simulations, it is clear that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ is a scaled and rotated version of $mathbf{w}$ (see Fig. 1).



We have $mathbf{w} = sum_{m=1}^{M} mathbf{v}_{m}$ and $tilde{mathbf{w}} = sum_{m=1}^{M} alpha_{m}mathbf{R}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}$.



If we suppose that $alpha_{m} = gamma_{m}alpha_{1},~m neq 1$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{R}_{1},~m neq 1$, we can reduce the expression to $tilde{mathbf{w}} = alpha_{1}mathbf{R}_{1}Big(mathbf{v}_{1} + sum_{m=2}^{M} gamma_{m}mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}Big)$, which is still not entirely a simple scaling and rotation of the original basis $mathbf{V}$ (this is where I am at currently).



I wonder if there is a way to prove this. The objective for me is not to obtain a direct relation between the different parameters, but rather to prove simply that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ may be characterised on the overall, as a 'total' scaling and rotation of $mathbf{w}$.



Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



P.S. The trivial case is when $forall~m,~alpha_{m} = gamma$ and $forall~m,~mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}$, in which case we can write $tilde{mathbf{w}} = gammamathbf{S}mathbf{w}$.






vectors rotations







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    I have a set of vectors $mathbf{V} = [mathbf{v}_{1} cdots mathbf{v}_{M}] in mathbb{R}^{N times M}$. The sum of these vectors will form another vector $mathbf{w} in mathbb{R}^{N}$, as is already known.



    Now, say that for each $mathbf{v}_{m}$, I apply a scaling and rotation factor $alpha_{m}$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} in mathbb{R}^{N times N}$, the sum will give me a vector $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ which is possibly different from $mathbf{w}$.



    I don't know how to prove it (hence the question), but from some simulations, it is clear that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ is a scaled and rotated version of $mathbf{w}$ (see Fig. 1).



    We have $mathbf{w} = sum_{m=1}^{M} mathbf{v}_{m}$ and $tilde{mathbf{w}} = sum_{m=1}^{M} alpha_{m}mathbf{R}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}$.



    If we suppose that $alpha_{m} = gamma_{m}alpha_{1},~m neq 1$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{R}_{1},~m neq 1$, we can reduce the expression to $tilde{mathbf{w}} = alpha_{1}mathbf{R}_{1}Big(mathbf{v}_{1} + sum_{m=2}^{M} gamma_{m}mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}Big)$, which is still not entirely a simple scaling and rotation of the original basis $mathbf{V}$ (this is where I am at currently).



    I wonder if there is a way to prove this. The objective for me is not to obtain a direct relation between the different parameters, but rather to prove simply that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ may be characterised on the overall, as a 'total' scaling and rotation of $mathbf{w}$.



    Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



    Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



    P.S. The trivial case is when $forall~m,~alpha_{m} = gamma$ and $forall~m,~mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}$, in which case we can write $tilde{mathbf{w}} = gammamathbf{S}mathbf{w}$.






    vectors rotations







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      I have a set of vectors $mathbf{V} = [mathbf{v}_{1} cdots mathbf{v}_{M}] in mathbb{R}^{N times M}$. The sum of these vectors will form another vector $mathbf{w} in mathbb{R}^{N}$, as is already known.



      Now, say that for each $mathbf{v}_{m}$, I apply a scaling and rotation factor $alpha_{m}$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} in mathbb{R}^{N times N}$, the sum will give me a vector $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ which is possibly different from $mathbf{w}$.



      I don't know how to prove it (hence the question), but from some simulations, it is clear that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ is a scaled and rotated version of $mathbf{w}$ (see Fig. 1).



      We have $mathbf{w} = sum_{m=1}^{M} mathbf{v}_{m}$ and $tilde{mathbf{w}} = sum_{m=1}^{M} alpha_{m}mathbf{R}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}$.



      If we suppose that $alpha_{m} = gamma_{m}alpha_{1},~m neq 1$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{R}_{1},~m neq 1$, we can reduce the expression to $tilde{mathbf{w}} = alpha_{1}mathbf{R}_{1}Big(mathbf{v}_{1} + sum_{m=2}^{M} gamma_{m}mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}Big)$, which is still not entirely a simple scaling and rotation of the original basis $mathbf{V}$ (this is where I am at currently).



      I wonder if there is a way to prove this. The objective for me is not to obtain a direct relation between the different parameters, but rather to prove simply that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ may be characterised on the overall, as a 'total' scaling and rotation of $mathbf{w}$.



      Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



      Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



      P.S. The trivial case is when $forall~m,~alpha_{m} = gamma$ and $forall~m,~mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}$, in which case we can write $tilde{mathbf{w}} = gammamathbf{S}mathbf{w}$.






      vectors rotations







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I have a set of vectors $mathbf{V} = [mathbf{v}_{1} cdots mathbf{v}_{M}] in mathbb{R}^{N times M}$. The sum of these vectors will form another vector $mathbf{w} in mathbb{R}^{N}$, as is already known.



      Now, say that for each $mathbf{v}_{m}$, I apply a scaling and rotation factor $alpha_{m}$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} in mathbb{R}^{N times N}$, the sum will give me a vector $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ which is possibly different from $mathbf{w}$.



      I don't know how to prove it (hence the question), but from some simulations, it is clear that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ is a scaled and rotated version of $mathbf{w}$ (see Fig. 1).



      We have $mathbf{w} = sum_{m=1}^{M} mathbf{v}_{m}$ and $tilde{mathbf{w}} = sum_{m=1}^{M} alpha_{m}mathbf{R}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}$.



      If we suppose that $alpha_{m} = gamma_{m}alpha_{1},~m neq 1$ and $mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{R}_{1},~m neq 1$, we can reduce the expression to $tilde{mathbf{w}} = alpha_{1}mathbf{R}_{1}Big(mathbf{v}_{1} + sum_{m=2}^{M} gamma_{m}mathbf{S}_{m}mathbf{v}_{m}Big)$, which is still not entirely a simple scaling and rotation of the original basis $mathbf{V}$ (this is where I am at currently).



      I wonder if there is a way to prove this. The objective for me is not to obtain a direct relation between the different parameters, but rather to prove simply that $tilde{mathbf{w}}$ may be characterised on the overall, as a 'total' scaling and rotation of $mathbf{w}$.



      Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



      Fig.1 Example of applying scale and rotation to vectors. Black: original vectors in 3-D Euclidean space. Red: scaled and rotated versions of the original. Broken lines: individual vectors. Full line: vector formed from the sum of each individual vectors



      P.S. The trivial case is when $forall~m,~alpha_{m} = gamma$ and $forall~m,~mathbf{R}_{m} = mathbf{S}$, in which case we can write $tilde{mathbf{w}} = gammamathbf{S}mathbf{w}$.






      vectors rotations




      vectors rotations






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 12 '18 at 9:23









      KaiserHazKaiserHaz

      367




      367






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0












          $begingroup$

          Two arbitrary vectors can always be related to each other by a scaling and a rotation. In particular, the scaling factor is the ratio of the norms; in 3D, the rotation axis is parallel to the cross product, and in $N$D it is not uniquely defined.



          Your question is somewhat vacuous.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the insight.
            $endgroup$
            – KaiserHaz
            Dec 12 '18 at 10:42












          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
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3036451%2fsum-of-vectors-and-the-effect-of-applying-rotation-and-scale-factors%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









          0












          $begingroup$

          Two arbitrary vectors can always be related to each other by a scaling and a rotation. In particular, the scaling factor is the ratio of the norms; in 3D, the rotation axis is parallel to the cross product, and in $N$D it is not uniquely defined.



          Your question is somewhat vacuous.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the insight.
            $endgroup$
            – KaiserHaz
            Dec 12 '18 at 10:42
















          0












          $begingroup$

          Two arbitrary vectors can always be related to each other by a scaling and a rotation. In particular, the scaling factor is the ratio of the norms; in 3D, the rotation axis is parallel to the cross product, and in $N$D it is not uniquely defined.



          Your question is somewhat vacuous.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the insight.
            $endgroup$
            – KaiserHaz
            Dec 12 '18 at 10:42














          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          Two arbitrary vectors can always be related to each other by a scaling and a rotation. In particular, the scaling factor is the ratio of the norms; in 3D, the rotation axis is parallel to the cross product, and in $N$D it is not uniquely defined.



          Your question is somewhat vacuous.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Two arbitrary vectors can always be related to each other by a scaling and a rotation. In particular, the scaling factor is the ratio of the norms; in 3D, the rotation axis is parallel to the cross product, and in $N$D it is not uniquely defined.



          Your question is somewhat vacuous.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 12 '18 at 9:55

























          answered Dec 12 '18 at 9:49









          Yves DaoustYves Daoust

          132k676229




          132k676229












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the insight.
            $endgroup$
            – KaiserHaz
            Dec 12 '18 at 10:42


















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the insight.
            $endgroup$
            – KaiserHaz
            Dec 12 '18 at 10:42
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for the insight.
          $endgroup$
          – KaiserHaz
          Dec 12 '18 at 10:42




          $begingroup$
          Thank you for the insight.
          $endgroup$
          – KaiserHaz
          Dec 12 '18 at 10:42


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3036451%2fsum-of-vectors-and-the-effect-of-applying-rotation-and-scale-factors%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          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







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

          Image
          3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
          Read more

          Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

          Image
          up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
          Read more

          Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

          Image
          0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
          Read more