1: \documentstyle[amsfonts,12pt]{article}
2: \input epsf
3: \def\thefootnote{\sharp}
4: \def\underscore#1{\underline{\vphantom{q}#1}}
5: \def\mapsisoto{
6: \makebox[0pt][l]{\raisebox{1.75pt}{\hspace*{3.2pt}$\cong$}}\longrightarrow}
7: \def\rom#1{{\normalshape #1}}
8: \def\rank{\mathop{\mathrm{rank}}}
9: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}
10: \newtheorem{cor}{Corollary}
11: \def\thethm{}
12: \def\thecor{}
13: \newenvironment{prf}{\begin{trivlist}\item[]{\bf Proof} }%
14: {\hfill $\Box$ \end{trivlist}}
15: \begin{document}
16: \begin{center}\Large\bf Drawing with Complex Numbers\\[15pt]
17: \large\mediumseries Michael Eastwood\footnote{Supported by the Australian
18: Research Council.} and Roger Penrose
19: \end{center}
20:
21: It is not commonly realized that the algebra of complex numbers can be used in
22: an elegant way to represent the images of ordinary $3$-dimensional figures,
23: orthographically projected to the plane. We describe these ideas here, both
24: using simple geometry and setting them in a broader context.
25:
26: Consider orthogonal projection in Euclidean $n$-space onto an
27: $m$-di\-men\-sion\-al
28: subspace. We may as well choose co\"ordinates so that this is the standard
29: projection $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^m$ onto the first $m$ variables. Fix a
30: non-degenerate simplex $\Sigma$ in~${\Bbb R}^n$. Two such simplices are said to
31: be \underscore{similar} if one can be obtained from the other by a Euclidean
32: motion together with an overall scaling. This article answers the
33: following question. Given $n+1$ points in ${\Bbb R}^m$, when can these points
34: be obtained as the images under $P$ of the vertices of a simplex similar
35: to~$\Sigma$?
36:
37: When $n=3$ and $m=2$, then $P$ is the standard \underscore{orthographic}
38: projection (as often used in engineering drawing) and we are concerned with how
39: to draw a given tetrahedron. We shall show, for example, that four points
40: $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta$ in the plane are the orthographic projections of
41: the vertices of a \underscore{regular} tetrahedron if and only if
42: \begin{equation}\label{tetrahedron}
43: (\alpha+\beta+\gamma+\delta)^2=4(\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2+\delta^2)
44: \end{equation}
45: where $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta$ are regarded as \underscore{complex}
46: numbers! Similarly, suppose a cube is orthographically projected and normalised
47: so that a particular vertex is mapped to the origin. If $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$
48: are the images of the three neighbouring vertices, then
49: \begin{equation}\label{cube}\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2=0,\end{equation}
50: again as a \underscore{complex} equation. Conversely, if this equation is
51: satisfied, then one can find a cube whose orthographic image is given in this
52: way. Since parallel lines are seen as parallel in the drawing,
53: equation~(\ref{cube}) allows one to draw the general cube:
54: \begin{center}
55: \begin{picture}(100,100)(-20,0)
56: \put(-150,-50){\epsfysize=700pt \epsffile{gauss.eps}}
57: \put(153,97){$\gamma$}
58: \put(37,87){$\beta$}
59: \put(121,5){$\alpha$}
60: \put(116,74){$0$}
61: \put(-150,50){\begin{tabular}l In this example, $\alpha=2-26i$\\
62: \phantom{In this example,} $\beta=-23+2i$\\
63: \phantom{In this example,} $\gamma=14+7i$\end{tabular}}
64: \end{picture}
65: \end{center}
66:
67: The result for a cube is known as \underscore{Gauss'} \underscore{fundamental}
68: \underscore{theorem} \underscore{of} \linebreak \underscore{axonometry}---see
69: \cite[p.~309]{gauss} where it is stated without proof. In engineering drawing,
70: one usually fixes three \underscore{principal} axes in Euclidean three-space
71: and then an orthographic projection onto a plane transverse to these axes is
72: known as an \underscore{axonometric} projection (see, for example,
73: \cite[Chapter~17]{hoelscherandspringer}). Gauss' theorem may be regarded as
74: determining the degree of foreshortening along the principal axes for a general
75: axonometric projection. The projection corresponding to taking
76: $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ to be the three cube roots of unity is called
77: \underscore{isometric} projection because the foreshortening is the same for
78: the three principal axes. In an axonometric drawing, it is conventional to take
79: the image axes at mutually obtuse angles:
80: \begin{center}
81: \begin{picture}(100,110)(50,5)
82: \put(-150,-50){\epsfysize=700pt \epsffile{weisbach.eps}}
83: \put(102,102){$A$}
84: \put(133.5,58.5){$B$}
85: \put(87.5,51.5){$C$}
86: \end{picture}
87: \end{center}
88: If $|\alpha|=a$, $|\beta|=b$, $|\gamma|=c$, then equation~(\ref{cube}) is
89: equivalent to the sine rule for the triangle with sides $\alpha^2$, $\beta^2$,
90: $\gamma^2$, namely
91: $$\frac{a^2}{\sin 2A}=\frac{b^2}{\sin 2B}=\frac{c^2}{\sin 2C}.$$
92: In this form, the fundamental theorem of axonometry is due to Weisbach and was
93: published in T\"ubingen in 1844 in the Polytechnische Mitteilungen of Volz and
94: Karmasch. Equivalent statements can be found in modern engineering drawing
95: texts (e.g.~\cite[p.~44]{rothandvanhaeringen}).
96:
97: Equation (\ref{cube}) may be used to give a ruler and compass construction of
98: the general orthographic image of a cube. If we suppose that the image of a
99: vertex and two of its neighbours are already specified, then (\ref{cube})
100: determines (up to a two-fold ambiguity) the image of the third neighbour. The
101: construction is straightforward except perhaps for the construction of a
102: complex
103: square root for which we advocate the following as quite efficient:
104: \begin{center}
105: \begin{picture}(100,110)(50,5)
106: \put(-150,-50){\epsfysize=700pt \epsffile{sqrt.eps}}
107: \put(132,104){$z$}
108: \put(153,73){$\sqrt z$}
109: \put(104,51){$0$}
110: \put(153,44){$1$}
111: \put(42,44){$\zeta$}
112: \put(109,45){$\bullet$}
113: \put(146,45){$\bullet$}
114: \put(146,73){$\bullet$}
115: \put(125,101){$\bullet$}
116: \put(50,45){$\bullet$}
117: \end{picture}
118: \end{center}
119: Firstly $\zeta$ is constructed by marking the real axis at a distance~$\|z\|$
120: from the origin. Then, a circle is constructed passing through the three points
121: $\zeta$, $1$, and~$z$. Finally, the angle between $1$ and $z$ is bisected and
122: $\sqrt z$ appears where this bisector meets the circle.
123:
124: In engineering drawing, it is more usual that the images of the three principal
125: axes are prescribed or chosen by the designer and one needs to determine the
126: relative degree of foreshortening along these axes. There is a ruler and
127: compass construction given by T.~Schmid in 1922 (see, for example,
128: \cite[\S17.17--17.19]{hoelscherandspringer}):
129: \begin{center}
130: \begin{picture}(100,80)(50,5)
131: \put(-88,-177){\epsfysize=1200pt \epsffile{schmid.eps}}
132: \put(177,14){$\alpha$}
133: \put(91,30){$\beta$}
134: \put(20,17){$P$}
135: \put(149,70){$Q$}
136: \put(75,43){$R$}
137: \put(134,37){$0$}
138: \put(170.3,11){$\bullet$}
139: \put(86,22){$\bullet$}
140: \put(29.5,11){$\bullet$}
141: \put(142,67){$\bullet$}
142: \put(86,39){$\bullet$}
143: \put(142,32.3){$\bullet$}
144: \end{picture}
145: \end{center}
146: In this diagram, the three principal axes and $\alpha$ are given. By drawing a
147: perpendicular from $\alpha$ to one of the of the principal axes and marking its
148: intersection with the remaining principal axis, we obtain~$P$. The point $Q$ is
149: obtained by drawing a semi-circle as illustrated. The point $R$ is on the
150: resulting line and equidistant with $\alpha$ from~$Q$. Finally, $\beta$ is
151: obtained by dropping a perpendicular as shown. It is easy to see that this
152: construction has the desired effect---in Euclidean three-space rotate the
153: right-angled triangle with hypotenuse $P\alpha$ about this hypotenuse until the
154: point $Q$ lies directly above $0$ in which case $R$ will lie directly
155: above~$\beta$ and the third vertex will lie somewhere over the line through $0$
156: and~$Q$. One may verify the appropriate part of Weisbach's condition
157: \begin{equation}\label{partialweisbach}
158: \frac{a^2}{\sin 2A}=\frac{b^2}{\sin 2B}\end{equation}
159: by the following calculation. Without loss of generality we may represent all
160: these points by complex numbers normalised so that~$Q=1$. Then it is
161: straightforward to check that
162: $$R\!=\!1+i-i\alpha,\;
163: P\!=\!\frac{\alpha(\alpha+\overline\alpha)+2(1-\alpha-\overline\alpha)}
164: {\alpha-\overline\alpha},\;
165: \beta\!=\!\frac{\alpha(\alpha+\overline\alpha)+2(1-\alpha-\overline\alpha)}
166: {2-\alpha-\overline\alpha}i$$
167: and therefore that
168: $$\alpha^2+\beta^2 =
169: 4\frac{(\alpha-1)\overline{(\alpha-1)}(\alpha+\overline\alpha-1)}
170: {(\alpha+\overline\alpha-2)^2}.$$
171: That $\alpha^2+\beta^2$ is real is equivalent to~(\ref{partialweisbach}).
172:
173: To prove Gauss' theorem more directly consider three vectors in ${\Bbb R}^3$
174: as the columns of a $3\times 3$ matrix. This matrix is orthogonal
175: if and only if the three vectors are orthonormal. It is
176: equivalent to demand that the three rows be orthonormal.
177: However, any two orthonormal vectors in ${\Bbb R}^3$ may be extended
178: to an orthonormal basis. Thus, the condition that three vectors
179: $$\left\lgroup\begin{array}c x_1\\y_1\end{array}\right\rgroup\qquad
180: \left\lgroup\begin{array}c x_2\\y_2\end{array}\right\rgroup\qquad
181: \left\lgroup\begin{array}c x_3\\y_3\end{array}\right\rgroup$$
182: in ${\Bbb R}^2$ be the images under $P:{\Bbb R}^3\to{\Bbb R}^2$ of an
183: orthonormal basis of ${\Bbb R}^3$, is that
184: $$\left\lgroup\begin{array}{ccc} x_1&x_2&x_3\end{array}\right\rgroup
185: \quad\mbox{ and }\quad
186: \left\lgroup\begin{array}{ccc} y_1&y_2&y_3\end{array}\right\rgroup$$
187: be orthonormal in~${\Bbb R}^3$. Dropping the overall scale, we obtain
188: $$x_1{}^2+x_2{}^2+x_3{}^2=y_1{}^2+y_2{}^2+y_3{}^2\quad\mbox{ and }\quad
189: x_1y_1+x_2y_2+x_3y_3=0.$$
190: Writing, $\alpha=x_1+iy_1$, $\beta=x_2+y_2$, $\gamma=x_3+y_3$, these two
191: equations are the real and imaginary parts of~(\ref{cube}). To deduce the case
192: of a regular tetrahedron as described by equation~(\ref{tetrahedron}) from the
193: case of a cube as described by equation~(\ref{cube}), it suffices to note that
194: equation~(\ref{tetrahedron}) is translation invariant and that a regular
195: tetrahedron may be inscribed in a cube. Thus, we may take
196: $\delta=\alpha+\beta+\gamma$ and observe that (\ref{tetrahedron}) and
197: (\ref{cube}) are then equivalent.
198:
199: It is easy to see that the possible images of a particular tetrahedron $\Sigma$
200: in ${\Bbb R}^3$ under an arbitrary Euclidean motion followed by the projection
201: $P$ form a $5$-dimensional space---the group of Euclidean motions is
202: $6$-dimensional but translation orthogonal to the plane leaves the image
203: unaltered. It therefore has codimension $3$ in the $8$-dimensional space of all
204: tetrahedral images ($2$~degrees of freedom for each vertex). Allowing similar
205: tetrahedra rather than congruent reduces the codimension to~$2$. Therefore, two
206: real equations are to be expected. Always, these two real equations combine as
207: a single \underscore{complex} equation such as (\ref{tetrahedron})
208: or~(\ref{cube}). At first sight, this is perhaps surprising and even more so
209: when the same phenomenon occurs for $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^2$ for
210: arbitrary~$n$.
211:
212: For $n=3$, there is a proof of Gauss' theorem which brings in complex numbers
213: at the outset. Consider the space $H$ of Hermitian $2\times 2$ matrices with
214: zero trace, i.e. matrices of the form
215: $$X=\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}w&u+iv\\ u-iv&-w\end{array}\right\rgroup\quad
216: \mbox{for }
217: \left\lgroup\begin{array}c u\\ v\\ w\end{array}\right\rgroup\in{\Bbb R}^3.$$
218: We may identify $H$ with ${\Bbb R}^3$ and, in so doing, $-\det X$ becomes the
219: square of the Euclidean length. The group $G$ of invertible $2\times 2$ complex
220: matrices of the form
221: $$\Lambda=\left\lgroup\matrix{a & -b\cr
222: \overline b & \overline a}\right\rgroup$$
223: acts linearly on $H$ by $X\mapsto\Lambda X\overline\Lambda^t$. Moreover,
224: $$\det(\Lambda X\overline\Lambda^t)=(|a|^2+|b|^2)^2\det X$$
225: so $G$ acts by similarities. It is easy to check that all similarities may be
226: obtained in this way. (This trick is essentially as used in Hamilton's theory
227: of quaternions and is well known to physicists---in modern parlance it is
228: equivalent to the isomorphism of Lie groups
229: ${\mathrm{Spin}}(3)\cong{\mathrm{SU}}(2)$.) Therefore, an arbitrary
230: orthographicimage of a cube may be obtained by acting with $\Lambda$ on the
231: standard basis
232: $$\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}0&1\\ 1&0\end{array}\right\rgroup,
233: \quad\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}0&i\\ -i&0\end{array}\right\rgroup,
234: \quad\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}1&0\\ 0&-1\end{array}\right\rgroup$$
235: and then picking out the top right hand entries. We obtain
236: $$\begin{array}{rclclcl}
237: \Lambda\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}0&1\\ 1&0\end{array}\right\rgroup
238: \overline\Lambda^t & =
239: &\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}\ast&a^2-b^2\\ \ast&\ast\end{array}\right\rgroup
240: &\longmapsto& a^2-b^2&=&\alpha\\[20pt]
241: \Lambda\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}0&i\\ -i&0\end{array}\right\rgroup
242: \overline\Lambda^t & =
243: &\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}\ast&i(a^2+b^2)\\
244: \ast&\ast\end{array}\right\rgroup
245: &\longmapsto& i(a^2+b^2)&=&\beta\\[20pt]
246: \Lambda\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}1&0\\ 0&-1\end{array}\right\rgroup
247: \overline\Lambda^t & =
248: &\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cc}\ast&2ab\\ \ast&\ast\end{array}\right\rgroup
249: &\longmapsto& 2ab&=&\gamma\end{array}$$
250: and therefore $\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2=0$, as required. Conversely,
251: this is exactly the condition that $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ may be written in this
252: form. (Compare the half angle formulae---if $s^2+c^2=1$, then $s=2t/(1+t^2)$
253: and $c=(1-t^2)/(1+t^2)$ for some~$t$.) That Gauss~\cite[p.~309]{gauss} makes
254: the same observation concerning the form of $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ suggests that
255: perhaps he also had this reasoning in mind.
256:
257: The proof of Gauss' theorem using orthogonal matrices clearly extends to
258: $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^2={\Bbb C}$ for arbitrary~$n$. To state it, the
259: following
260: terminology concerning the standard projection $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^m$ is
261: useful. We shall say that $v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_n\in{\Bbb R}^m$ are
262: \underscore{normalised} \underscore{eutactic} if and only if there is an
263: orthonormal basis $u_1,u_2,\ldots,u_n$ of ${\Bbb R}^n$ with $v_j=Pu_j$
264: for~$j=1,2,\ldots,n$. We shall say that $v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_n\in{\Bbb R}^m$ are
265: \underscore{eutactic} if and only if $\mu v_1,\mu v_2,\ldots,\mu v_n$ are
266: normalised eutactic for some~$\mu\not=0$.
267: \begin{thm} The points $z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_n\in{\Bbb C}={\Bbb R}^2$ are
268: eutactic if and only if
269: $$z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_n{}^2=0$$
270: and not all $z_j$ are zero.\end{thm}
271: There is a proof for $n=4$ based on the isomorphism
272: $${\mathrm{Spin}}(4)\cong{\mathrm{SU}}(2)\times{\mathrm{SU}}(2)$$
273: and, indeed, this is how we came across the theorem in the first place.
274: However, a more direct route to complex numbers and one which applies in all
275: dimensions is based on the observation that ${\mathrm{Gr}}_2^+({\Bbb R}^2)$,
276: the Grassmannian of oriented two-planes in ${\Bbb R}^n$, is naturally a
277: \underscore{complex} manifold. When $n=3$, this Grassmannian is just the
278: two-sphere and has a complex structure as the Riemann sphere. In general,
279: consider the mapping
280: $${\Bbb{CP}}_{n-1}\setminus{\Bbb{RP}}_{n-1}\stackrel{\pi}{\longrightarrow}
281: {\mathrm{Gr}}_2^+({\Bbb R}^n)$$
282: induced by~${\Bbb C}^n\ni z\mapsto iz\wedge\overline z$. In other words, a
283: complex vector $z=x+iy\in{\Bbb C}^n$ is mapped to the two-dimensional oriented
284: subspace of ${\Bbb R}^n$ spanned by $x$ and $y$, the real and imaginary parts
285: of~$z$. Let $\langle\phantom{z},\phantom{z}\rangle$ denote the standard inner
286: product on ${\Bbb R}^n$ extended to ${\Bbb C}^n$ as a complex bilinear form.
287: Then, $\langle z,z\rangle=0$ imposes two real equations
288: $$\|x\|^2=\|y\|^2\quad\mbox{and}\quad\langle x,y\rangle=0$$
289: on the real and imaginary parts. In other words, $x,y$ is proportional to an
290: orthonormal basis for~${\mathrm{span}}\{x,y\}$. Hence, if $z$ and $w$ satisfy
291: \mbox{$\langle z,z\rangle=0=\langle w,w\rangle$} and define the same oriented
292: two-plane, then $w=\lambda z$ for some~$\lambda\in{\Bbb C}\setminus\{0\}$. The
293: non-singular complex quadric
294: $$K=\{[z]\in{\Bbb{CP}}_{n-1}\mbox{ s.t. }\langle z,z\rangle=0\}$$
295: avoids ${\Bbb{RP}}_{n-1}\subset{\Bbb{CP}}_{n-1}$ and we have shown that
296: $\pi|_K$ is injective. It is clearly surjective. The isomorphism
297: $$\pi:K\mapsisoto{\mathrm{Gr}}_2^+({\Bbb R}^n)$$
298: respects the natural action of ${\mathrm{SO}}(n)$ on $K$
299: and~${\mathrm{Gr}}_2^+({\Bbb R}^n)$. The generalised Gauss theorem follows
300: immediately since, rather than asking about the image of a general orthonormal
301: basis under the standard projection $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^2$, we may,
302: equivalently, ask about the image of the standard basis $e_1,e_2,\ldots,e_n$
303: under a general orthogonal projection onto an oriented
304: two-plane~$\Pi\subset{\Bbb R}^n$. Any such $\Pi$ is naturally complex, the
305: action of $i$ being given by rotation by $90^\circ$ in the positive sense.
306: If $\Pi$ is represented by $[z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_n]\in K$ as above and we use
307: $x,y\in\Pi$ to identify $\Pi$ with~${\Bbb C}$, then $e_j\mapsto z_j$ and
308: $$z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_n{}^2=\langle z,z\rangle=0,$$
309: as required. Conversely, a solution of this complex equation determines an
310: appropriate plane~$\Pi$.
311:
312: For the case of a general tetrahedron or simplex and for general $m$ and $n$,
313: it is more convenient to start with Hadwiger's theorem \cite{hadwiger} or
314: \cite[page 251]{coxeter} as follows. The proof is obtained by extending our
315: orthogonal matrix proof of Gauss' theorem.
316: \begin{thm}[Hadwiger] Assemble $v_1,v_2,\ldots,,v_n\in{\Bbb R}^m$ as the
317: columns of an $m\times n$ matrix~$V$. These vectors are normalised eutactic
318: if and only if~$VV^t=1$ \rom{(}the $m\times m$ identity matrix\rom{)}.
319: \end{thm}
320: \begin{prf} If $v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_n$ are normalised eutactic, then assembling a
321: corresponding orthonormal basis of ${\Bbb R}^n$ as the columns of an
322: $n\times n$ matrix, we have $V=PU$ and $U^tU=1$ (the $n\times n$ identity
323: matrix). Therefore, $UU^t=1$ and
324: $$VV^t=PUU^tP^t=PP^t=1,$$
325: as required. Conversely, if $VV^t=1$, then the columns of $V^t$ may be
326: completed to an orthonormal basis of ${\Bbb R}^n$, i.e.\ $V^t=U^tP^t$ for
327: $UU^t=1$. Now, $U^tU=1$ and $V=PU$, as required. \end{prf}
328:
329: The case of a general simplex is obtained essentially by a change of basis as
330: follows. Suppose $a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_n,a_{n+1}$ are the vertices of a
331: non-degenerate simplex $\Sigma$ in~${\Bbb R}^n$ whose centre of mass is at the
332: origin. In other words, the $n\times(n+1)$ matrix $A$ has rank $n$ and $Ae=0$
333: where $e$ is the column vector all of whose $n+1$ entries are~$1$. Form the
334: $(n+1)\times(n+1)$ symmetric matrix
335: $$Q=A^t(AA^t)^{-2}A,$$
336: noting that $\rank A=n$ implies the \underscore{moment} \underscore{matrix}
337: $AA^t$ is invertible.
338: \begin{thm} Given $b_1,b_2,\ldots,b_n,b_{n+1}\in{\Bbb R}^m$ assembled as the
339: columns of an $m\times(n+1)$ matrix $B$, these vectors are the images under
340: orthogonal projection $P:{\Bbb R}^n\to{\Bbb R}^m$ of the vertices of a simplex
341: congruent to $\Sigma$ if and only if
342: \begin{equation}\label{simplex} BQ^tB=1.\end{equation}\end{thm}
343: \begin{prf} The vertices of a simplex congruent to $\Sigma$ are the columns of
344: a matrix $UA+ae^t$ for some orthogonal matrix $U$ and translation vector
345: $a\in{\Bbb R}^n$. Also, note that $Qe=0$. Thus, if $B=P(UA+ae^t)$, then
346: $$\begin{array}{rcl}
347: BQB^t&=&PUAQA^tU^tP^t\\
348: &=&PUAA^t(AA^t)^{-2}AA^tU^tP^t\\
349: &=&PUU^tP^t\,=\,PP^t\,=\,1,\end{array}$$
350: as required. Conversely, $Qe=0$ implies that (\ref{simplex}) is translation
351: invariant. So, without loss of generality, we may suppose that
352: $b_1+b_2+\cdots+b_n+b_{n+1}=0$, that is to say, $Be=0$. Writing out
353: (\ref{simplex}) in full gives
354: $$BA^t(AA^t)^{-1}(BA^t(AA^t)^{-1})^t=1$$
355: so, by Hadwiger's theorem, there is an orthogonal matrix $U$ so that
356: $$BA^t(AA^t)^{-1}=PU.$$
357: Thus,
358: $$BA^t(AA^t)^{-1}A=PUA\quad\mbox{ and }\quad Be=0.$$
359: Certainly, $B=PUA$ is a solution of these equations but it is the only solution
360: since $A^t(AA^t)^{-1}A$ has rank $n$ and $e$ is not in the range of this linear
361: transformation. \end{prf}
362: \begin{cor}[case $\bold{m=2}$] Points
363: $z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_n,z_{n+1}\in{\Bbb C}$ are the images under orthogonal
364: projection of the vertices of a simplex similar to $\Sigma$ if and only if
365: $$z^tQz=0$$
366: where $z$ is the column vector with components
367: $z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_n,z_{n+1}$.\end{cor}
368:
369: It is, of course, possible to compute $Q$ explicitly for any given example. If
370: the simplex $\Sigma$ has some degree of symmetry, however, we can often
371: circumvent such computation. Consider, for example, the case of a
372: \underscore{regular} simplex. From the corollary above, we know that the image
373: of such a simplex in the plane is characterised by a complex homogeneous
374: quadratic polynomial. The symmetries of the regular simplex ensure that this
375: polynomial must be invariant under ${\cal S}_{n+1}$, the symmetric group on
376: $n+1$ letters. Hence, it must be expressible in terms of the elementary
377: symmetric polynomials. Equivalently, it must be a linear combination of
378: $$(z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_n+z_{n+1})^2\quad\mbox{ and }\quad
379: z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_n{}^2+z_{n+1}{}^2.$$
380: Up to scale, there is only one such combination which is translation invariant,
381: namely
382: \begin{equation}\label{regularsimplex}(z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_n+z_{n+1})^2-
383: (n+1)(z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_n{}^2+z_{n+1}{}^2).\end{equation}
384: It follows that the vanishing of this polynomial is an equation which
385: characterises the possible images of a regular simplex under orthogonal
386: projection into the plane. The special case $n=2$ characterises the equilateral
387: triangles in the plane \cite[Problem 15 on page 79]{barnardandchild}.
388:
389: Equation (\ref{cube}) characterising the orthographic images of a cube, may be
390: deduced by similar symmetry considerations. If a particular vertex is mapped to
391: the origin and its neighbours are mapped to $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ then, since
392: each of these neighbouring vertices is on an equal footing, the polynomial in
393: question must be a linear combination of $(\alpha+\beta+\gamma)^2$ and
394: $\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2$. To find out which linear combination we need only
395: consider a particular projection, for example:
396: \begin{center}
397: \begin{picture}(70,70)
398: \put(10,60){\line(1,0){50}}
399: \put(60,10){\line(0,1){50}}
400: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}
401: \put(60,10){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}
402: \put(10,60){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}
403: \put(-7,67){\makebox(0,0){$\gamma=i$}}
404: \put(77,3){\makebox(0,0){$\beta=1$}}
405: \put(-7,3){\makebox(0,0){$\alpha=0$}}
406: \thicklines
407: \put(10,10){\line(1,0){50}}
408: \put(10,10){\line(0,1){50}}
409: \end{picture}
410: \end{center}
411: In this example, $(\alpha+\beta+\gamma)^2=2i$ and
412: $\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2=0$. Up to scale, therefore, (\ref{cube}) is the
413: correct equation.
414:
415: The case of a regular dodecahedron is similar. Using the fact that a cube may
416: be inscribed in such a dodecahedron \cite{hilbertandcohn-vossen}, we may deduce
417: a particular projection:
418: \begin{center}
419: \begin{picture}(100,130)(-50,0)
420: \put(-450,-125){\epsfysize=1200pt \epsffile{dodecahedron.eps}}
421: \put(-56,60){$\bullet$}
422: \put(-44,93){$\bullet$}
423: \put(-44,27){$\bullet$}
424: \put(-98,60){$\bullet$}
425: \put(-60,54){\scriptsize$0$}
426: \put(-94,54){\scriptsize$\beta=-1$}
427: \put(-37,26){\scriptsize$\displaystyle\gamma=\frac{\sqrt 5-1}{4}
428: -\frac{\sqrt 5+1}{4}i$}
429: \put(-37,96){\scriptsize$\displaystyle\alpha=\frac{\sqrt 5-1}{4}
430: +\frac{\sqrt 5+1}{4}i$}
431: \put(104,28){\scriptsize$1$}
432: \put(115,61){\tiny$\displaystyle\frac{\sqrt 5+1}{2}$}
433: \end{picture}
434: \end{center}
435: with $(\alpha+\beta+\gamma)^2=(7-3\sqrt 5)/2$ and
436: $\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2=(2-\sqrt 5)/2$. In this particular case,
437: $$(\alpha+\beta+\gamma)^2+(\sqrt 5-1)(\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2)=0.$$
438: Therefore, this is the correct equation in the general case. It may be used as
439: the basis of a ruler and compass construction of the general orthographic
440: projection of a regular dodecahedron.
441:
442: It is interesting to note that if \underscore{all} the vertices of a Platonic
443: solid are orthographically projected to $z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_N\in{\Bbb C}$, then
444: \begin{equation}\label{platonic}(z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_N)^2=
445: N(z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_N{}^2)\end{equation}
446: (compare (\ref{regularsimplex})). For a tetrahedron, this is just
447: equation~(\ref{tetrahedron}). To verify (\ref{platonic}) for the other Platonic
448: solids, firstly note that it is translation invariant. Therefore, it suffices
449: to impose $z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_N=0$ and show that
450: $z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_N{}^2=0$. The case of a cube now follows immediately
451: since its vertices may be grouped as two regular tetrahedra. The dodecahedral
452: case may be dealt with by grouping its vertices into five regular tetrahedra.
453: The regular octahedron is amenable to a similar trick but not the icosahedron.
454: Rather than resorting to direct computation, a uniform proof may be given as
455: follows. As before, assemble the vertices of the given solid $\Sigma$ as the
456: columns of a matrix~$A$, now of size~$3\times N$, and consider the moment
457: matrix~$M\equiv AA^t$. Observe that
458: $$\left\lgroup\begin{array}{ccc} 1&i&0\end{array}\right\rgroup M
459: \left\lgroup\begin{array}c 1\\ i\\ 0\end{array}\right\rgroup
460: =z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_N{}^2.$$
461: The moment matrix is positive definite and symmetric. In other words, it
462: defines a metric on ${\Bbb R}^3$, manifestly invariant under the symmetries
463: of~$\Sigma$. If $\Sigma$ is regular---or, more generally, enjoys the symmetries
464: of a regular solid (e.g.~a cuboctahedron or rhombicosidodecahedron)---then its
465: symmetry group acts irreducibly on~${\Bbb R}^3$. Thus, $M$ must be proportional
466: to the identity matrix and the result follows. For a general solid $\Sigma$,
467: the two complex numbers
468: $$\pm\sqrt{z_1{}^2+z_2{}^2+\cdots+z_N{}^2}$$
469: are the foci of the ellipse
470: $$\left\lgroup\begin{array}{ccc} x&y\end{array}\right\rgroup R
471: \left\lgroup\begin{array}c x\\ y\end{array}\right\rgroup=1$$
472: where $R$ is the inverse of the quadratic form obtained by restricting M to the
473: plane of projection.
474:
475: This reasoning also works in higher dimensions where it shows (as conjectured
476: to us by H.S.M. Coxeter) that the orthogonally projected images in the plane of
477: the $N$ vertices of any regular polytope, real or complex, will satisfy
478: equation (\ref{platonic}). Of course, this excludes regular polygons (whose
479: symmetry groups act reducibly except in dimension two) orthographic images
480: of which will satisfy (\ref{platonic}) if and only if the image is itself
481: regular. For polyhedra other than simplices, a quadratic equation such as
482: (\ref{platonic}) is no longer sufficient to characterise the orthogonal image
483: up to scale. In general, there will also be some linear relations. For a
484: non-degenerate $N$-gon there will be $N-n-1$ such relations. The simplest
485: example is a square in ${\Bbb R}^2$ which is characterised by the complex
486: equations
487: $$(\alpha+\beta+\gamma+\delta)^2=4(\alpha^2+\beta^2+\gamma^2+\delta^2)\quad
488: \mbox{ and }\quad\alpha+\gamma=\beta+\delta.$$
489:
490: It is interesting to investigate further the relationship between a
491: non-degenerate simplex $\Sigma$ in ${\Bbb R}^n$ and its quadratic
492: form $Q=A^t(AA^t)^{-2}A$. Recall that $A$ is the $n\times(n+1)$ matrix whose
493: columns are the vertices of~$\Sigma$. There are several other formulae for or
494: characterisations of~$Q$. Let $S$ denote the $(n+1)\times(n+1)$ symmetric
495: matrix
496: $$\mbox{\huge $1$}\;
497: \raisebox{4pt}{$\displaystyle-\;\frac{1}{n+1}\left\lgroup\begin{array}{cccc}
498: 1&1&\cdots&1\\
499: 1&1&\cdots&1\\
500: \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\
501: 1&1&\cdots&1\end{array}\right\rgroup$}.$$
502: It is the matrix of orthogonal projection in ${\Bbb R}^{n+1}$ in the direction
503: of the vector~$e$. We maintain that $Q$ is characterised by the equations
504: $$QA^tA=S\quad\mbox{ and }\quad Qe=0.$$
505: Certainly, if these equations hold, then they are enough to determine $Q$
506: because the moment matrix $M\equiv A^tA$ has rank $n$ and $e$ is not in its
507: range. The second equation is evident and the first equation with $Q$ replaced
508: by $A^t(AA^t)^{-2}A$ and simplified reads
509: $$A^t(AA^t)^{-1}A=S.$$
510: To see that this holds it suffices to observe that it is clearly true after
511: post-multiplication by $A^t$ or~$e$. We may equally well characterise $Q$ by
512: means of the equations
513: $$A^tAQ=S\quad\mbox{ and }\quad Qe=0.$$
514: These equations relate $M$ and $Q$ geometrically---both matrices annihilate
515: $e$ whilst on the hyperplane orthogonal to $e$ they are mutually inverse. This
516: implies that $M$ and $Q$ are \underscore{generalised} \underscore{inverses}
517: \cite{penrose} of each other. Thus,
518: $$Q=M^\dagger=(A^tA)^\dagger=A^\dagger A^{\dagger t}$$
519: where $A^\dagger$ is the generalised inverse of~$A$. In this case,
520: $A^\dagger=A^t(AA^t)^{-1}$. This also shows how to compute $Q$
521: more directly in certain cases. The moment matrix $M$ has direct geometric
522: interpretation as the various inner products of the vectors
523: $a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_n,a_{n+1}$. In the case of a regular simplex, for example, we
524: know that $\|a_i\|^2$ is independent of $i$, that $\|a_i-a_j\|^2$ is
525: independent of $i\not= j$, and that $a_1+a_2+\ldots+a_n+a_{n+1}=0$. We may
526: deduce that, with a suitable overall scale, $M=S$. Since $S^\dagger=S$, it
527: follows that~$Q=S$. This is a direct derivation
528: of~(\ref{regularsimplex}).
529:
530: It is clear geometrically that $M$ or, equivalently, $Q$ determines $\Sigma$
531: up to congruency. Alternatively, one can argue algebraically---it is easy to
532: check that if $A^tA=B^tB$, then $U=AA^t(BA^t)^{-1}$ is orthogonal and $A=UB$.
533: Therefore, the possible quadratic forms $Q$ which can arise give a natural
534: parametrisation of the non-degenerate simplices up to congruency. Choosing
535: a basepoint $\Sigma_0$ with corresponding matrix $A_0$, and mapping
536: $X\in{\mathrm{GL}}(n,{\Bbb R})$ to $X^{-1}A_0$ identifies the space of
537: non-degenerate simplices up to congruency with the homogeneous space
538: ${\mathrm{GL}}(n,{\Bbb R})/{\mathrm O}(n)$. This homogeneous space may also be
539: identified with the space of positive definite $n\times n$ quadratic forms by
540: sending $X\in{\mathrm{GL}}(n,{\Bbb R})$ to~$XX^t$. The $(n+1)\times(n+1)$
541: quadratic form $Q$ corresponding to $X^{-1}A_0$ is given by
542: $A_0^\dagger XX^tA_0^{\dagger t}$. It follows that the general $Q$ which can
543: arise is characterised by the following two conditions:
544: \begin{itemize}
545: \item $Qe=0$ and only multiples of $e$ are in the kernel of~$Q$.
546: \item All other eigenvalues of $Q$ are positive.
547: \end{itemize}
548: It is also possible to repeat this analysis in pseudo-Euclidean spaces. The
549: only difference is that the condition that the non-zero eigenvalues of $Q$ be
550: positive is replaced by a condition on sign precisely reflecting the original
551: signature of the inner product.
552:
553: Finally we should mention some possible applications. There is much current
554: interest in \underscore{computer} \underscore{vision}. In particular, there is
555: the problem of recognising a wire-frame object from its orthographic image. The
556: results we have described can be used as test on such an image, for example to
557: see whether a given image could be that of a cube or to keep track of a moving
558: shape. It is clear that such tests could be implemented quite efficiently.
559: Another possibility is in the manipulation of CADD\footnote{Computer Aided
560: Drafting and Design.} data. Rather than storing an image as an array of vectors
561: in ${\Bbb R}^3$, it may be sometimes be more efficient to store certain
562: tetrahedra within such an image by means of the corresponding quadratic form.
563: For orthographic imaging this may be preferable.
564:
565: We would like to thank H.S.M.~Coxeter for drawing our attention to Hadwiger's
566: article, R.~Michaels and J.~Cofman for pointing out Gauss'
567: and Weisbach's work, and E.J.~Pitman for many useful conversations.
568:
569: \small\renewcommand{\section}{\subsubsection}\begin{thebibliography}{XXX}
570: \bibitem{barnardandchild} S. Barnard and J.M. Child,
571: {\em Higher Algebra},
572: MacMillan 1936.
573: \bibitem{coxeter} H.S.M. Coxeter,
574: {\em Regular Polytopes},
575: Methuen 1948.
576: \bibitem{gauss} C.F. Gauss,
577: {\em Werke, Zweiter Band},
578: K\"oniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, G\"ottingen 1876.
579: \bibitem{hadwiger} H. Hadwiger,
580: {\em \"Uber ausgezeichnete Vectorsterne und regul\"are Polytope},
581: Comment. Math. Helv. {\bf 13} (1940), 90--108.
582: \bibitem{hilbertandcohn-vossen} D. Hilbert and S. Cohn-Vossen,
583: {\em Geometry and the Imagination},
584: Chelesa 1952, 1983, 1990.
585: \bibitem{penrose} R. Penrose,
586: {\em A generalised inverse for matrices},
587: Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. {\bf 51} (1955), 406--413.
588: \bibitem{rothandvanhaeringen} R.N. Roth and I.A. van Haeringen,
589: {\em The Australian Engineering Drawing Handbook, Part One},
590: The Institute of Engineers, Australia 1988.
591: \bibitem{hoelscherandspringer} R.P. Hoelscher and C.H. Springer,
592: {\em Engineering Drawing and Geometry, Second Edition},
593: Wiley 1961.
594: \end{thebibliography}
595:
596: \begin{tabbing}
597: Department of Pure Mathematics space \= \kill
598: Department of Pure Mathematics \> Mathematical Institute\\
599: University of Adelaide \> 24-29 Saint Giles'\\
600: South AUSTRALIA 5005 \> Oxford OX1 3LB\\
601: \> ENGLAND
602: \end{tabbing}
603: \end{document}
604: