0
$\begingroup$

I have a question about the correctness of my ideas regarding the following exercise.

Define

$A_0=[(1,0,0,0)]$

$B_0=[(0,1,0,0)]$

$A_1=[(0,0,1,0)]$

$B_1=[(0,0,0,1)] \in \mathbb RP^3$ where $\mathbb RP^3$ denotes real projective space.

Let $l_0$ be the line through $A_0$ and $B_0$ and $l_1$ be the line through $A_1$ and $B_1$. Let $l_2$ be an arbitrary line skew to both $l_0$ and $l_1$ and let $A_2=[a]$ and $B_2=[b]$ be two points of $l_2$ so that $P=[s \cdot a+ t \cdot b] $ is a general point of $l_2$. Let $\pi$ be the plane spanned by $l_0$ and P and define Q to be the intersection of $\pi$ with $l_1$. Let f be the map $f: l_2 \to l_1$ defined by $f(P)=Q.$ Find a matrix in $PGL(3,\mathbb R)$ corresponding to f.

My idea to find the matrix was this: We know that the representation vector $x$ of point $X$ in $\pi$ can be written as

$$x=s_0 \cdot (1,0,0,0)+t_0 \cdot (0,1,0,0)+k_0(sa+tb)\tag1$$

for $s_0,t_0,k_0 \in \mathbb R$.

The respresentation vector $y$ of a point $Y$ on $l_1$ can be written as

$$y=s_1 \cdot (0,0,1,0) + t_1 \cdot (0,0,0,1)\tag2$$

for $s_1, t_1 \in \mathbb R$.

Since the line $l_2$ is determined by the points $A_2$ and $B_2$ it is sufficient to find a matrix $A=(a_{ij})$ that maps the representation vectors $a$ and $b$ onto representation vectors of the points $(\pi A_2)\cap l_1$ and $(\pi B_2)\cap l_1$. The representation vectors of the image points must satisfy the equations $(1)$ and $(2)$. So we get the following equations

$Aa=s_0' \cdot (1,0,0,0)+t_0' \cdot (0,1,0,0)+a$

$Aa=s_1' \cdot (0,0,1,0) + t_1' \cdot (0,0,0,1)$

$Ab=s_0'' \cdot (1,0,0,0)+t_0'' \cdot (0,1,0,0)+b$

$Ab=s_1'' \cdot (0,0,1,0) + t_1'' \cdot (0,0,0,1)$

Since the matrix $A$ has 16 entries we get 16 equations in total. Solving this system with respect to the entries of $A$ should give me the matrix I need.

My question is:

Is there an easier way to solve this than solving a system of 16 equations?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ $A_0$ and $B_0$ are identical. Did you mean to write $B_0=[(0,1,0,0)]$? $\endgroup$ – amd Jan 11 at 21:07
  • $\begingroup$ The wording of this problem is troublesome. “Let $f$ be the map $f:l_2\to l_1$” defines $f$ as a homography of two lines (an element of $PGL(2,\mathbb R)$), but asks for a matrix in $PGL(3,\mathbb R)$. Moreover, $PGL(3)$ operates on the projective plane, but the problem is set in a higher-dimensional space. $\endgroup$ – amd Jan 11 at 21:55
  • $\begingroup$ I also have a quibble with the phrasing “the map.” Even if we restrict ourselves to a homography between two lines, a single point correspondence doesn’t determine a unique map. $\endgroup$ – amd Jan 11 at 21:57
  • $\begingroup$ I’m guessing that when you write $IR$, you actually mean $\mathbb R$. Use \mathbb R to get this symbol. $\endgroup$ – amd Jan 11 at 21:58
  • $\begingroup$ I can imagine two ways to read the question. Either you want $Q=[s'\cdot a'+t'\cdot b']$, probably with $A_1=[a'], B_1=[b']$, and then express $s',t'$ in terms of $s,t$, which would lead to a $2\times2$ matrix. Or you want $Q$ as an arbitrary point in space, projecting the whole space to $l_1$ as described. In that case $l_2$ is irrelevant, and you get a $4\times4$ matrix of rank $2$. It would be non-invertible. Like amd I can't see $\textrm{PGL}(3,\mathbb R)$ playing a role, since it has equivalence classes of invertible $3\times3$ matrices. Please double-check the question statement. $\endgroup$ – MvG Jan 14 at 23:01

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.