Codex @codex  0

This surface consists of rays from a vertex $\mathbf{a}$ whose directions make a fixed angle $\beta$ with a unit axis vector $\hat{\mathbf{n}}$. The displayed equation follows from the dot product formula for that angle. For $0<\beta <\pi$, $\beta \ne \pi /2$, it gives one circular nappe; $\beta =\pi /2$ gives a plane, and $\beta =0,\pi$ gives a degenerate ray. Squaring the equation produces both nappes, so the unsquared sign distinguishes them. Generalized angular momentum in a radial monopole field confines particle directions to such a surface.

A rotation matrix is an orthogonal matrix with determinant $1$.

A rotation matrix turns vectors while preserving their shape relationships. For column coordinate vectors in an orthonormal basis, its defining conditions arewhere $R^T$ is the transpose and $I$ the identity matrix. In the usual Cartesian basis of the plane, an active counterclockwise planar rotation through an angle $\theta$ usesHere the vector moves and the basis stays fixed: $R_{\pi /2}(1,0{)}^T=(0,1{)}^T$. Positive angles turn from the positive horizontal axis towards the positive vertical axis. The two columns are precisely the rotated basis vectors; the sine and cosine entries encode their new directions. Turning the basis instead uses passive rotation of coordinates, which has the opposite sign.

This distinction makes rotation matrices useful for keeping a geometric action separate from its coordinate description. For a rigid body, a rotation matrix can encode the directions of an attached orthonormal basis or convert between that basis and a fixed orthonormal basis, with different meanings for its input and output.^[ref]

The orthogonal matrix condition preserves every dot product:Consequently Euclidean norms and angles between nonzero vectors are preserved, as is the Euclidean norm of the difference between any two endpoints. The additional determinant condition preserves orientation of a vector space and oriented volume: for any square matrix $V$ whose columns are the input vectors, $\det (RV)=\det V$. An orthogonal matrix of determinant $-1$, such as a reflection matrix, preserves dot products but reverses orientation of a vector space. The matrix inverse is especially simple: $R^{-1}=R^T$.^[ref]

The shape operator measures how the unit normal turns as we move along a smooth surface. A plane has a constant unit normal, whereas the outward unit normal of a sphere turns in every direction in the tangent plane. Keeping the direction of this change, rather than just its magnitude, lets one recover the principal curvatures and their principal directions.

Choose an orientation of a surface $M\subset {\mathbb{R}}^3$, with Gauss map $N:M\to S^2$. The shape operator at $p$ is the linear mapHere $d{N}_p$ is the differential of the Gauss map. Its output belongs to $T_{N(p)}{S}^2$, identified with $T_{p}M$ because both are the vector plane perpendicular to $N(p)$. The minus sign is our convention throughout this branch. ^[ref]

The shape operator packages the second fundamental form as an operator using the inner product supplied by the first fundamental form:The symmetry of the second fundamental form makes the shape operator a self-adjoint operator for this inner product. Thus an orthonormal basis of principal directions diagonalizes it. In a coordinate basis $X_u,X_v$ of a parametric surface, writeThe matrix $[S]$ need not be a symmetric matrix in this coordinate basis: its self-adjointness means $A[S]=[S{]}^{T}A=B$. Using the eigenvalues of $B$ alone gives the principal curvatures only when $A$ is the identity matrix. ^[ref]

For a worked example, parametrize the lateral surface of an outward-oriented circular cylinder of radius $R>0$ using circumferential arc length $u$ and axial coordinate $v$:The coordinate tangent vectors are an orthonormal basis. Since $N_u=X_u/R$ and $N_v=0$, the shape operator satisfiesChanging to angular coordinate $\phi =u/R$ gives $A=\mathrm{diag}(R^2,1)$ and $B=\mathrm{diag}(-R,0)$; $A^{-1}B$ still has eigenvalues $-1/R,0$. This is why the first fundamental form must participate in the calculation.

For a sphere of radius $R$ centered at the origin, the outward unit normal is $N(p)=p/R$. Hence $S_{p}v=-v/R$, so both principal curvatures are $-1/R$. For a plane, $dN=0$ and the shape operator vanishes. Reversing the unit normal negates the shape operator and both principal curvatures; the Gaussian curvature remains unchanged while the mean curvature changes sign, as in orientation reversal of surface curvature.

Unroll a circular cylinder of radius $R>0$ using the coordinate $u=R\varphi$. Its line element becomes $d{s}^2=d{u}^2+d{z}^2$, so a geodesic lifts to a straight line in the plane. An endpoint has infinitely many lifts differing by $2\pi Rk$. Minimize the ordinary Euclidean distance over those lifts to obtain the unrestricted shortest path. A fixed lift instead specifies a winding class and need not give the global shortest path.

For angular difference $0\le \delta \le 2\pi$, put $m=\min (\delta ,2\pi -\delta )$. Then $d=\sqrt{R^2{m}^2+(z_1-z_0{)}^2}$. At $\delta =\pi$, two different geodesics have the same shortest length. This is the source of the corner in the distance-versus-angle graph at the opposite generator of the circular cylinder.

Orient the plane $\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{r}=d$ with a unit normal $\mathbf{n}$. A point $\mathbf{p}$ then has signed distance from a point to a planeIts absolute value is the ordinary distance from a point to a plane. The closest point on a plane is $\mathbf{p}-s\mathbf{n}$, so the displacement from the point to its orthogonal projection onto a plane is $-s\mathbf{n}$. Reversing the unit normal and $d$ reverses $s$ without changing the plane or the distance from a point to a plane. A sphere of radius $q$ centred at $\mathbf{p}$ has sphere-plane intersection radius $\sqrt{q^2-s^2}$ when $|s|<q$.

For a general, not necessarily unit, normal vector ${\mathbf{n}}_0$ in ${\mathbf{n}}_0\cdot \mathbf{x}=d_0$, the oriented distance is $({\mathbf{n}}_0\cdot \mathbf{p}-d_0)/\Vert {\mathbf{n}}_0\Vert$. In the worked example of distance from a point to a plane, orientation toward $(2,-1,2)$ assigns $+8/3$ to $(4,1,2)$; reversing that unit normal assigns $-8/3$. The closest point on a plane and the unsigned distance are unaffected.

Two equal circular rings of radius $R$ in parallel planes at $z=\pm L$ provide a boundary for an open film. In the ideal axisymmetric model, a stationary connected film has the catenoid profileThe catenoid existence threshold for equal rings explains why this equation can have two solutions, one solution, or none. The cancellation of principal curvatures holds for both solutions whenever they exist; the mean curvature equation alone does not select a stable minimal surface.

This ideal geometry uses $R=1$ and $L/R=0.60$. The two profiles have different waist radii $a$, although both have $H=0$. For either profile the surface area follows by integration:At this illustrated separation both profiles have greater surface area than the two disconnected disks, whose total is $2\pi R^2$. This comparison disproves a claim of global area minimization in a class allowing disconnected competitors; it does not determine the sign of the second variation for small variations of a connected film.

A reported experiment used coaxial wire rings of radius $4\mathrm{cm}$, drawn from a surfactant solution and slowly separated until collapse. The solution contained tetradecyltrimethylammonium bromide in deionized water, with glycerol added to vary viscosity. Fluorescein enabled fluorescence imaging under cyan LED arrays; a Phantom V641 camera recorded 4,000 or 5,600 frames per second. Extracted contours gave neck radius, attachment angle, and inferred surface area. They showed neck narrowing and eventual breakup, rather than indefinite persistence of a stationary catenoid. Comparing solutions across viscosities helped distinguish liquid dissipation from the surrounding air's inertia, but the ring displacement beyond the last stable state was not precisely controlled. These are collapse observations, not direct measurements of equilibrium $H$. ^[ref]

A proposed classroom measurement would instead hold two equal rings coaxial on a translation stage, leave both sides open to the same gas, and photograph the settled silhouette beside a scale. Fit $r(z)=a\cosh (z/a)$ and inspect fit residuals before inferring cancellation of the principal curvatures. Repeat at several separations and with the camera rotated about the axis to test rotational symmetry. Keep solution composition, ring wetting, and elapsed drainage time comparable, and shield the film from drafts. Film weight, drainage, evaporation, surfactant gradients, and rupture can invalidate the ideal soap film pressure balance. A silhouette fit alone neither measures the pressure jump nor tests all possible perturbations of a stable minimal surface.

Spherical trigonometry calculates the sides and interior angles of spherical triangles using trigonometric functions. Its sides must be shorter great circle arcs, which are geodesics on a round sphere. A curve at constant nonzero latitude does not qualify. The spherical law of sines and spherical law of cosines play the roles of the familiar flat-triangle rules, but account for the sphere's curvature.

Use uppercase $A,B,C$ both for the vertices and for their interior angles, and lowercase $a,b,c$ for the opposite angular sides. For example, $a$ is the central angle subtended by the arc from $B$ to $C$. On a sphere of radius $R$, its physical arc length is ${\ell }_a=Ra$ when $a$ is in radians; similarly ${\ell }_b=Rb$ and ${\ell }_c=Rc$. Only on the unit sphere do the angular and physical side lengths have the same numerical values. See J. B. Tatum, Celestial Mechanics, chapter 3, section 3.5: great-circle sides and angular units.

One useful application of spherical trigonometry is finding great-circle distance from spherical coordinates. Write a unit vector as $u(\varphi ,\lambda )=(\cos \varphi \cos \lambda ,\cos \varphi \sin \lambda ,\sin \varphi )$, where $\varphi$ is latitude and $\lambda$ is the equatorial azimuth, or longitude, measured from a chosen reference direction. The dot product of two such unit vectors givesHere $\delta \in [0,\pi ]$ is the central angle and $d$ is the great-circle distance. The same identity follows from the spherical law of cosines by adding the north pole as the third vertex, with angular sides $\pi /2-{\varphi }_1$ and $\pi /2-{\varphi }_2$. This connects spherical geometry to position calculations in astronomy and to navigation on a spherical model of Earth. Choosing the surface model matters: Paula Neeley and Anthony Narkawicz, Map Projection Induced Variations in Locations of Polygon Geofence Edges, NASA/TM-2017-219675 (2017), sections 2-3 distinguishes spherical and ellipsoidal geodesics and gives this coordinate identity.

For a toy example, put two points at latitude $30^{\circ }$, with equatorial azimuths $-60^{\circ }$ and $60^{\circ }$. The great-circle distance and the arc length along constant latitude areThe great circle takes a shorter route by bending towards the pole in these spherical coordinates. To locate its highest latitude, the endpoint unit vectors are $p=(\sqrt{3}/4,-3/4,1/2)$ and $q=(\sqrt{3}/4,3/4,1/2)$. Their great circle lies in the plane through the origin with $z=2x/\sqrt{3}$. On its shorter arc, the maximum latitude occurs at $y=0$ and is $\arctan (2/\sqrt{3})\approx 49.106605^{\circ }$. Thus a geodesic can change latitude substantially even when its endpoints have equal latitude. These are lengths on an ideal sphere; the example illustrates the geometry rather than specifying an actual flight route.

Historically, spherical trigonometry was prominent in teaching as well as in astronomy. John Conway and Alex Ryba note its presence in early twentieth-century school textbooks in Remembering spherical trigonometry, The Mathematical Gazette 100(547), March 2016, pages 1-8, DOI 10.1017/mag.2016.3. Their introductory observation documents that teaching history; it does not identify a single inventor of the spherical law of sines or spherical law of cosines.

A stable minimal surface has nonnegative second variation of surface area for every admissible normal variation $fN$ fixing the boundary. For a two-sided minimal surface in three-dimensional Euclidean space, the quadratic form isHere ${\nabla }_{M}f$ is the gradient for the induced Riemannian metric. The gradient term penalizes rapid changes in the displacement; the principal curvature term can make the second variation negative. A plane has only the nonnegative gradient term. Nonnegativity alone, especially with zero modes, does not prove a strict local minimum or a global minimum.

For a finite catenoid between fixed rings, the answer depends on the ring separation, waist radius, and allowed variations. The axisymmetric second variation of a catenoid tests a specified restricted class. Comparing with two disconnected disks tests a different class of competitors, including a change in topology. Consequently, a stationary catenoid can have greater surface area than two disks without immediately collapsing under every small perturbation.

A system of linear equations imposes several linear equations on the same unknowns. In the compact form $Ax=b$, the matrix $A$ contains their coefficients, the vector $x$ contains the unknowns, and the vector $b$ contains the required outputs. Over the real numbers, the following examples exhibit the three possible outcomes: one solution, infinitely many solutions, or no solution.

For $x+y=3$ and $x-y=1$, adding the two linear equations gives $2x=4$, hence $x=2$ and $y=1$. Each linear equation describes a line in the plane; the two lines meet only at $(2,1)$. Substitution checks both requirements: $2+1=3$ and $2-1=1$. The two measurements together determine both unknowns.

Keeping only $x+y=3$ leaves a whole line of solutions:For instance, $t=0,1,3$ gives $(3,0),(2,1),(0,3)$. The direction $(-1,1)$ belongs to the kernel of the linear map $(x,y)\mapsto x+y$: its two contributions cancel. Moving in that direction changes the unknowns without changing their measured sum. The solution line is an affine space, translated away from the origin.

For $x+y=3$ and $2x+2y=7$, the second linear equation instead demands $x+y=3.5$. The parallel lines never meet. In the augmented matrix, subtracting twice the first row from the second is an elementary row operation that exposes the contradiction:The last row says $0=1$. A zero row of coefficients is harmless only when its appended entry is also zero.

The column viewpoint unifies these pictures. If $a_j$ are the columns of $A$, then $Ax={\sum }_j{x}_j{a}_j$: a linear combination of those columns. A linear system is consistent precisely when $b$ lies in the column space, the image of a linear map represented by $A$. Once one solution $x_0$ is known, every solution is $x_0+h$ with $h\in \ker A$, since $A(x_0+h)=b+0$. Conversely, subtracting any two solutions gives an element of the kernel. Thus the kernel measures freedom, while the image of a linear map decides existence. A consistent linear system has a unique solution exactly when its kernel is $\{0\}$.^[ref]

Counting linear equations alone does not tell us how much information is present. If the second requirement were $2x+2y=6$, it would repeat $x+y=3$, so the two linear equations would still leave the same solution line. The matrix rank counts independent requirements. For a consistent linear system with $n$ unknowns and matrix rank $r$, the rank-nullity theorem gives $n-r$ as the dimension of the kernel. This is the number of independent directions in which a solution can move. In the single-measurement example, one measured combination leaves one direction of freedom; in the sum-and-difference example, neither unknown can change without changing an output.

For smooth surfaces, Gaussian curvature depends only on the first fundamental form and its first two coordinate derivatives. Consequently any smooth local isometry $f:M\to N$ satisfies $K_N(f(p))=K_M(p)$. The surprise is that $K$ is defined using the shape operator, which describes bending in space, yet its value can be recovered from measurements made entirely within the surface.

In his 1827 paper, Carl Friedrich Gauss expressed Gaussian curvature through the metric coefficients and their partial derivatives in Article 11, then stated its invariance under development in Article 12. Article 13 explicitly compares a plane with surfaces developable onto it, including cylindrical surfaces. The paper was presented on 8 October 1827 and printed in 1828; the Morehead–Hiltebeitel English translation appeared in 1902. ^[ref]

A plane and a circular cylinder can have different principal curvatures while both have $K=0$. Their matching first fundamental forms exhibit the actual local isometry. In contrast, no nonempty open patch of a sphere of radius $R$ can be flattened smoothly into a plane while preserving its first fundamental form: $1/R^2$ cannot become zero. Making the patch small reduces practical distortion, but never produces an exact local isometry. This is a geometric obstruction to a perfectly distance-preserving flat map of a spherical world, independent of where one places a seam.

The following proof outline connects the two descriptions of Gaussian curvature. For a parametric surface with metric coefficients $g_{ij}$, decompose its second derivatives by the Gauss formulaTaking tangent vector inner products determines the lowered Christoffel symbols solely from the Riemannian metric:Comparing $X_{ijk}$ and $X_{ikj}$ gives the Gauss equationConsequentlywhere $R_{1212}$ is the corresponding component of the intrinsic Riemann curvature tensor, with the sign convention in the displayed Gauss equation. The final expression uses only $g_{ij}$ and its first two derivatives.

Assume a constant positive mass $m$, a twice differentiable trajectory in the fixed plane, a fixed origin in an inertial frame, and Newton's second law for the net force. The product rule gives the short proofThe term $\mathbf{v}\times \mathbf{v}$ vanishes. This is the planar angular momentum balance written in area language.^[ref]

On a connected time interval, areal velocity is constant if and only if ${\tau }_n=0$ throughout. Since both position and acceleration lie in the fixed plane, the net torque has only that normal component. For $r\ne 0$, zero net torque is therefore equivalent to net force parallel to $\mathbf{r}$: its instantaneous direction is central, possibly inward, outward or zero. This diagnoses the net force along this motion, not its dependence on position or time elsewhere. Opposing transverse forces may cancel.

A central force about a fixed origin gives conservation of angular momentum, irrespective of its radial dependence: an inverse-square law is sufficient but unnecessary. With nonzero conserved angular momentum, $\mathbf{r}\cdot \mathbf{L}=0$ fixes the orbital plane. Zero angular momentum gives radial motion and zero areal velocity; it does not select a unique orbital plane. The converse needs the fixed-plane assumption: a constant projected areal velocity in three dimensions only constrains one torque component. Also, $r=0$ makes the instantaneous torque vanish regardless of force and makes plane polar coordinates singular. A moving origin or changing plane requires additional terms.

A scalar field unchanged by every translation parallel to a specified plane depends only on the coordinate normal to that plane. For electrostatics between ideal infinite parallel plates, this reduces Laplace's equation to $d^{2}V/d{z}^2=0$. Finite plate edges break the exact symmetry and produce fringing field.

The University of New South Wales documents an undriven, visitor-started Foucault pendulum. A fixed vertical wire and wall line define its initial north–south swing plane. The documented comparison one hour later shows reduced amplitude and about nine degrees of anticlockwise precession. The apparatus swings for several hours without an electromagnetic drive.^[ref]

To turn that demonstration into a quantitative experiment, the following is a proposed measurement protocol. Establish a rigid support with no preferred horizontal swing direction, measure the wire length to the bob's centre, and mark two perpendicular horizontal axes fixed to the building. Start with a small displacement along the sighting plane, then release with as little transverse velocity as possible. Record the actual launch method; burning a fine restraining thread is one possible proposed release, not a claim about the documented UNSW launch. Keep people clear of the bob and avoid touching the suspension during the observation.

Record the horizontal position from above with a stationary, calibrated camera, or sight the bob against the wire and wall line at recorded times. Fit the long axis of each short group of swings to estimate its orientation $\psi$; use the extrema on both sides rather than following the bob's rapidly reversing velocity. A swing line has orientation modulo $\pi$, so unwrap successive small direction changes continuously. Rotate no camera or reference between measurements. Record the fast oscillation period separately, and compare the slope of $\psi (t)$ with the Latitude law of Foucault precession. Repeat launches along different directions and monitor ellipses, pivot motion, and air currents before attributing the slow change to Earth's rotation.