Find all invariant lines of an affine transformation in plane












0














Suppose we have affine transformation:



$$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$



How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?



Thanks in advance






linear-transformations affine-geometry







share|cite|improve this question





























    0














    Suppose we have affine transformation:



    $$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
    y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$



    How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?



    Thanks in advance






    linear-transformations affine-geometry







    share|cite|improve this question



























      0












      0








      0







      Suppose we have affine transformation:



      $$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
      y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$



      How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?



      Thanks in advance






      linear-transformations affine-geometry







      share|cite|improve this question















      Suppose we have affine transformation:



      $$begin{align}x^* &= 2x+y-2\
      y^* &= -3x- yend{align}$$



      How can we find the equations of all invariant lines?



      Thanks in advance






      linear-transformations affine-geometry




      linear-transformations affine-geometry






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 24 at 16:24









      Andrei

      11.1k21025




      11.1k21025










      asked Nov 24 at 16:19









      ziadxkabakibi

      11




      11






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
          Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
            – amd
            Nov 24 at 22:20












          • Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
            – Andrei
            Nov 24 at 22:37










          • In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
            – amd
            Nov 24 at 22:39












          • I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
            – Andrei
            Nov 24 at 22:41










          • Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
            – amd
            Nov 24 at 22:46



















          0














          Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as



          $$
          p = p_0 + lambda vec v
          $$



          then



          $$
          p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
          $$



          or



          $$
          A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
          $$



          so we have



          $$
          (A-I_2)vec v = 0\
          (A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
          $$



          now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.






          share|cite|improve this answer































            0














            Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.



            Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.






            share|cite|improve this answer























              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              });
              });
              }, "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "69"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3011744%2ffind-all-invariant-lines-of-an-affine-transformation-in-plane%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              0














              The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
              Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$






              share|cite|improve this answer





















              • You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:20












              • Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:37










              • In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:39












              • I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:41










              • Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:46
















              0














              The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
              Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$






              share|cite|improve this answer





















              • You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:20












              • Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:37










              • In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:39












              • I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:41










              • Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:46














              0












              0








              0






              The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
              Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$






              share|cite|improve this answer












              The equation of a line originally is $y=ax+b$. After transformation is $y^*=a^*x^*+b^*$. Plug in your equations for $x^*$ and $y^*$ into this equation, group the terms so you can rewrite it as $$y=f(a^*,b^*)x+g(a^*,b^*)$$
              Since the line is invariant, you have the same coefficients so $$f(a,b)=a\g(a,b)=b$$







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Nov 24 at 16:30









              Andrei

              11.1k21025




              11.1k21025












              • You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:20












              • Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:37










              • In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:39












              • I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:41










              • Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:46


















              • You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:20












              • Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:37










              • In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:39












              • I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
                – Andrei
                Nov 24 at 22:41










              • Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
                – amd
                Nov 24 at 22:46
















              You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:20






              You’re omitting vertical lines ($x=k$).
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:20














              Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
              – Andrei
              Nov 24 at 22:37




              Yes. I should have mentioned that you need to check that. It is trivial to show that it is not invariant
              – Andrei
              Nov 24 at 22:37












              In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:39






              In this case, yes, but you’re presenting $y=ax+b$ as the generic equation of any line whatsoever.
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:39














              I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
              – Andrei
              Nov 24 at 22:41




              I could have done $ax+by+c=0$, but then I need to check the ratio of the coefficients, since $2ax+2by+2c=0$ is the same line.
              – Andrei
              Nov 24 at 22:41












              Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:46




              Either way you have to make an extra check beyond what you’ve got here: on the one hand you have to deal separately with vertical lines, on the other you have to examine ratios.
              – amd
              Nov 24 at 22:46











              0














              Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as



              $$
              p = p_0 + lambda vec v
              $$



              then



              $$
              p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
              $$



              or



              $$
              A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
              $$



              so we have



              $$
              (A-I_2)vec v = 0\
              (A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
              $$



              now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.






              share|cite|improve this answer




























                0














                Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as



                $$
                p = p_0 + lambda vec v
                $$



                then



                $$
                p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
                $$



                or



                $$
                A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
                $$



                so we have



                $$
                (A-I_2)vec v = 0\
                (A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
                $$



                now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as



                  $$
                  p = p_0 + lambda vec v
                  $$



                  then



                  $$
                  p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
                  $$



                  or



                  $$
                  A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
                  $$



                  so we have



                  $$
                  (A-I_2)vec v = 0\
                  (A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
                  $$



                  now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.






                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  Calling $p = (x,y),, b = (-2,0)$ we have the generic line as



                  $$
                  p = p_0 + lambda vec v
                  $$



                  then



                  $$
                  p_0 + lambda vec v = A( p_0+lambdavec v) + b
                  $$



                  or



                  $$
                  A p_0-p_0+b = lambda(vec v-Avec v),,,forall lambdain mathbb{R}
                  $$



                  so we have



                  $$
                  (A-I_2)vec v = 0\
                  (A-I_2)p_0 + b = 0
                  $$



                  now solving for $vec v, p_0$ we have the invariant lines.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Nov 24 at 18:43

























                  answered Nov 24 at 18:35









                  Cesareo

                  8,1983516




                  8,1983516























                      0














                      Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.



                      Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer




























                        0














                        Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.



                        Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer


























                          0












                          0








                          0






                          Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.



                          Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          Working in homogeneous coordinates, the point transformation $mathbf x'=Mmathbf x$ transforms lines as $mathbf l'=M^{-T}mathbf l$. The invariant lines $mathbf l=(lambda,mu,tau)^T$ are those for which $M^{-T}mathbf l$ is a nonzero multiple of $mathbf l$, so finding them amounts to finding eigenvectors of $M^{-T}$ that correspond to real nonzero eigenvalues. Alternatively, since the homogeneous coordinates are three-dimensional, the invariant lines are the solutions of $mathbf ltimes M^{-T}mathbf l=0$.



                          Note that the line at infinity is always an invariant line of an affine transformation: the last column of $M^{-T}$ for such a transformation is $(0,0,1)^T$.







                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          edited Nov 24 at 22:59

























                          answered Nov 24 at 22:29









                          amd

                          29.1k21050




                          29.1k21050






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid …



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                              Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                              Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid …



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3011744%2ffind-all-invariant-lines-of-an-affine-transformation-in-plane%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              -

                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Plaza Victoria

                              Image
                              Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l
                              Read more

                              In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                              Image
                              .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box; } 2 OneNote has two useful keyboard shortcuts for bulleted and numbered lists, namely Ctrl + . and Ctrl + - . Is there something similar for PowerPoint where the work with lists is also very common? Haven't found anything here: Use keyboard shortcuts in PowerPoint. keyboard-shortcuts microsoft-powerpoint share | improve this question edited Aug 14 '14 at 14:49 Linger 2,826 10 28 40
                              Read more

                              How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...

                              Image
                              1 0 I want to put 3 images in LateX such as 2 figures are side by side horizotally and 3rd figure below these 2 side by side figures but in middle. I have following code: begin{figure}[H] centering begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.50linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8010_AP.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8010 AP} label{fig:Genelec 8010} end{minipage}% begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.69linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8020_CPM.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8020 CPM} label{fig:Genelec 8020} end{minipage}% end{figure} %%Here is my 3rd picture code begin{figure} centering includegraphics[width=5cm]{Text/Images/Genelec_8030_BPM.jpg} caption{Genelec 8030 BPM} label{fig:Genelec 8030} end{figure} I want to ask ho
                              Read more