Remix clone Hacker News

> Quaternions

I know nothing of physics, but it seems to me that rotation fingerprints are everywhere in physics. Is this just me or is there something more tangible in this remark?

▲ nimish 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Rotations and spin are deeply tied into the geometrical nature of a space. It's not just you. It's core to understanding the nature of matter itself.

Cartan had only just invented spinors as an object in themselves (ignoring clifford) so a lot of the physics stuff was done in parallel or even without the knowledge the mathematicians had.

▲ Ono-Sendai 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not just you. Dirac fields are constantly rotating. In fact the solutions are called spinors. (e.g. things that spin). There are a lot of rotations at the quantum level. It's also why complex numbers show up a lot in q.m.

▲ ValentinA23 5 days ago | parent [-]

I've been trying to get an intuitive understanding of why multiplying by e^ix leads to a rotation in the complex plane, without going into Taylor series (too algebraic, not enough geometric). I tried to find a way to calculate the value of e in a rotational setting, maybe there is a way to reinterpret compound interests as compound rotation. Any insight ?

▲ itishappy 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Euler's formula is a specific case of the exponential map from Lie theory. This means e^x can be used with all sorts of interesting x types, and it often has surprisingly intuitive behavior! When x is a real number you get continuous growth. When x is a purely imaginary number you get continuous rotation. When x is complex you get continuous growth and rotation. When x is a matrix you get a continuous linear transformation (growth, rotation, and shear). What's the similarity here? Euler's formula treats it's argument as a transformation which gets continuously applied in infinitesimal amounts. This also explains the formula for calculating the value of e:

    e = lim (1 + 1 / n) ^ n where (x -> infinity)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_map_(Lie_theory)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_exponential

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O85OWBJ2ayo

▲ ColinHayhurst 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Complex numbers and (Pauli/Dirac) matrices not required if you use Geometric Algebra. I highly recommend the book by Doran and Lasenby [0], or you can get the details from their papers, notably [1].

[0] Geometric Algebra for Physicists, CUP, 2003

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0509178

▲

ValentinA23 5 days ago | parent [-]

https://deferentialgeometry.org/papers/Doran,%20Lasenby%20-%...

page 28, equation 2.36. Thanks a lot I'll take a dive into this

Note: my inquiry was motivated by this:

https://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2014/01/the-fourier-tra...

	▲	ColinHayhurst 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		p281 for Dirac equation. But I suggest you start at least from the beginning of Chapter 8. Earlier, obviously if you don't know Geometric Algebra. It's worth it; many examples but one is that the four Maxwell equations are expressed as one compact equation with geometric intuition.

▲ sparky_z 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My favorite intuitive explanation was actually written by science fiction author, Greg Egan. It takes the exact approach you're asking for, reinterpreting compound interest in a 2d rotational context on the complex plane, and doesn't use more than high school math:

https://gregegan.net/FOUNDATIONS/04/found04.html#s2

Fig. 7 is the money shot.

▲ dboreham 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

IANAM but I'd go with "it's implicit in how complex numbers are defined". Complex numbers are a thing made up by humans (as are negative numbers), and we got to define i as "up the y-axis". Once you do that, and note that a rotation is therefore cos angle plus i sin angle, add in that e^something is an eigenfuncion of differentiation, and you're pretty much there.

Fwiw I think it's Maclaurin series for this.

Edit: obviously should be j not i.

▲ Ono-Sendai 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The first thing to understand is that multiplying a complex number by i rotates the complex number by 90 degrees counter-clockwise around the origin. For example, 1 * i = i (e.g. 1 + 0i is mapped to 0 + 1i). And i*i = -1 (e.g. 0 + 1i is mapped to (-1 + 0i) and so on. e^ix is a continuous generalisation of this discrete rotation, as I understand it.

▲ empiricus 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

One possibility: take the unit circle, and a vertical line tangent to the circle at (1,0). Then e^ix takes that line and wraps it around the circle. This

▲ cjfd 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Of course. The solutions of the Dirac equations live in space and space has rotation symmetry. These solution have to transform in some way under rotations.

▲ jabl 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

There's a lot of rotations and stuff in QM, yes. That you should do it with quaternions is mostly an internet thing. I have a PhD in physics, and I never encountered quaternions in any course I took, and from seeing curricula in other universities I haven't seen it there either.