2023-12-24

440: Rotation in n-Dimensional Euclidean Vectors Space Is Same 2-Dimensional Rotations Along (n - 2)-Dimensional Subspace Axis

<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>

A description/proof of that rotation in n-dimensional Euclidean vectors space is same 2-dimensional rotations along (n2)-dimensional subspace axis

Topics


About: Euclidean vectors space

The table of contents of this article


Starting Context



Target Context


  • The reader will have a description and a proof of the proposition that any rotation in the n-dimensional Euclidean vectors space is any same 2-dimensional rotations along any (n2)-dimensional subspace axis.

Orientation


There is a list of definitions discussed so far in this site.

There is a list of propositions discussed so far in this site.


Main Body


1: Description


For any Euclidean vectors space, Rn, any rotation in Rn is any same 2-dimensional rotations along any (n2)-dimensional subspace axis.


2: Note


This is not any rigorous proof but an intuitive understanding what rotation in any higher-dimensional Euclidean vectors space is.


3: Proof


Any rotation is a kind of map, f:RnRn.

Let us always think of rotations centered at the origin, which means that f(0)=0. Any rotation centered at another point, p0Rn, can be regarded to be f1ff, where f:RnRn, ppp0, the translation.

Any rotation in R3 is a rotation around an axis, which is a line (that passes the origin, which we will not mention here after, because our lines are always so, because we are thinking only about rotations centered at the origin).

As we tend to imagine a rotation as in R3, we tend to imagine a line as the axis.

But what is the axis for any rotation in R2? The line perpendicular to R2? But the line is not in R2, which seems a problem: why do we need to introduce the ambient R3 when we are thinking of the R2 space? At least, we did not need to introduce the ambient R4 in order to think of rotations in R3, which seems not symmetric.

What is 'axis' indeed? The axis of any rotation is the set of points that are fixed by the rotation.

In fact, the axis for any rotation in R2 is not the line in R3, but the origin, the point.

What is the axis for any rotation in R4? (x1,x2,x3,x4)(cosθx1sinθx2,sinθx1+cosθx2,x3,x4) is a rotation, which fixes the x3,x4 coordinates, which means that the fixed set is {(0,0)}×R2, which is the axis. So, the axis for any rotation in R4 is a 2-dimensional subspace of R4.

Generally, the axis for any rotation in Rn is an (n2)-dimensional subspace of Rn.

Let us think of a rotation in R3. The rotation has the axis as a (32)-dimensional subspace, a line. At each point on the axis, there is the (3(32)=2)-dimensional plane perpendicular to the axis. Do the rotation for such each plane centered at the intersection with the axis by any same angle, which is nothing but the rotation in R3. The reason why the axis of any rotation in R3 is a line is that 32=1, not that axis in general is a line, which is wrong.

Let us think of a rotation in Rn. The rotation has the axis as an (n2)-dimensional subspace. At each point on the axis, there is the (n(n2)=2)-dimensional plane perpendicular to the axis. Do the rotation for such each plane centered at the intersection with the axis by any same angle, which is nothing but the rotation in Rn.


References


<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>