This post is a continuation of Lie Sphere Geometry Part 2: unoriented circles. We will move to oriented circles now. Here I am trying to follow the exposition of this subject as it is described in Ch. 15. 1, Oriented circles in S3 of [1]. Instead of S3 I am taking S2 first. I say "I am trying to follow" instead of "I am following". The reason for that is that I am not entirely happy with my understanding of the exposition in this source.
![]() |
I am not entirely happy with my understanding of the exposition in this source. |
Of course there are other sources discussing the Lie Sphere Geometry, but each author has a different approach, different angle of approach, different main concepts, and I have chosen Jensen as best fitting to our purpose, at least for now. In this post we will discuss oriented circles on the sphere S2. Let us recall the definition from the previous post.
S2 = {x∈R3: x2 = 1}
For every m∈S2, and for every r∈[0,π] the unoriented circle Sr(m)is defined as
Sr(m) = {x∈S2: x·m = cos r}.
We have then
Sr(m)=Sπ-r(-m).
We now extend this definition of Sr(m) any r∈[0,2π]. Of course it makes sense, but Sr(m) = S2π-r(m). To remove this degeneracy, and following Ref. [1], we define the oriented circle as follows:
Definition. An oriented circle in S2 is a circle Sr(m), together with a choice of continuous unit normal vector field on it.
Ref. [1] expands this definition as follows.
We can use the radius to define an orientation of Sr(m) as follows. Recall that x∈Sr(m) if and only if x·m = cos(r). Let n∈TxS2 be the unit vector satisfying the equation
m = cos(r)x + sin(r)n. (0)
Except for the cases r = aπ for any integer a, this uniquely determines n for each point x on the locus. The cases r = aπ, a any integer, are the point spheres m and -m, and there is no condition on n in
n(x) = (m - cos(r) x)/sin(r). (1)
We consider point spheres to be in the set of all oriented spheres, but without orientation. Thus, the oriented spheres with
center m are parametrized by their radius r satisfying 0 ≤ r < 2π.
I
am having some problem with the formula (1) as r approaches 0. The
reasoning above was causing me some stomach problems. Therefore I
suggest a somewhat different approach. The rest of this post is my own
thinking about the subject.
So, let us consider the family of circles for a fixed m. In order to easily visualize thi family let us take m = (1,0,0). I will also use the letter t instead of r. That is because I want to treat the radius as a parameter of some kind of a dynamics. You will see it below.
The parametric equations x(t,ϕ) of the family are then:
x(t,ϕ) = cos(t),
y(t,ϕ) = sin(t)cos(ϕ),
z(t,ϕ) = sin(t)sin(ϕ).
Here ϕ is a parameter along the circle. For t=0 we have the point m=(1,0,0). We notice that
x(t,ϕ)2 = x(t,ϕ)2+y(t,ϕ)2+z(t,ϕ)2 ≡1,
so that the circles of constant t are indeed all on S2.
Now, for a fixed ϕ calculate the partial derivative ∂x(t,ϕ)/∂t with respect to t. We will call it the "velocity vector field" and denote it n(t,ϕ):
n(t,ϕ) = ∂x(t,ϕ)/∂t,
or, explicitly
nx(t,ϕ) = - sin(t),
ny(t,ϕ) = cos(t)cos(ϕ),
nz(t,ϕ) = cos(t)sin(ϕ).
We see that n(t,ϕ)2 = 1, so we have a field of unit vectors. Moreover n(t,ϕ)is tangent to the sphere at x(t,ϕ), as it is tangent to the great circle of constant ϕ.. Moreover, it is perpendicular to the circle of constant t. Let us calculate the numerator of (1) in our parametrization:
mx - cos(t)x(t,ϕ) = 1 -cos2(t) = sin2(t) = -sin(t)nx(t,ϕ) ,
my - cos(t)y(t,ϕ) = 0 - cos(t)sin(t)cos(ϕ) = - sin(t)ny(t,ϕ) ,
mz - cos(t)z(t,ϕ) = 0 - cos(t)sin(t)sin(ϕ). = - sin(t)nz(t,ϕ) .
Comparing with (1) we see that our n(t,ϕ) coincides with -n(x) of (1), but it makes a perfect sense also for t=0 and t=π.
![]() |
Simulation of n(t,ϕ) for varying t, and ϕ=0, π/2,π,3π/2. |
To be continued ...
References
[1] G.R. Jensen et al., Surfaces in Classical Geometries, Springer 2016.
P.S. 04-04-25 19:13 It will be necessary, later on, to generalize the above idea, so that it can be applied to spheres in S3 - our future step. This we will do using Clifford algebra, where we have already met formulas like Eq. (0) inside the Clifford algebra. At least this is my idea as of today.
choice of of ->
ReplyDeletechoice of
because i want ->
because I want
partial derivative ∂x(t,ϕ)/∂t with respect to t ->
is it defined in t=0 ?
sow e have ->
so we have
is tangent to the great circle of constant ϕ ->
semi circle !!!
Thanks.
Delete"is it defined in t=0 ?"
It is well defined for all real t.
"semi circle !!!"
For t varying in [0,2π] It is a full circle.
"For t varying in [0,2π] It is a full circle."
DeleteIndeed.
Ark, do you mean that you have managed to comb a hairy ball flat without a cowlick? :)
ReplyDeleteThank you for a very vivid illustration of moving circles - really helpful! What instrument did you use to draw it?
Thank you! Mathematica.
Delete