←back to thread

184 points mikhael | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
voxleone ◴[] No.45661522[source]
Quaternion libraries have work to do now.

Positive potential:

Simplified “undo” mechanism: this result suggests that a given traversal (sequence of rotations) might be “reset” (i.e., returned to origin) using a simpler method than computing a full inverse sequence. That could simplify any functionality in libraries, like SpinStep[0], that deal with “returning to base orientation” or “undoing steps.”

The libraries could include a method: given a sequence of quaternion steps that moved from orientation A to orientation B, compute a scale factor λ and then apply that scaled sequence twice to go from B back to A (or A to A). This offers a deterministic “reset” style operation which may be efficient.

Orientation‐graph algorithms: in libraries used in robotics/spatial AI, the ability to reliably reset orientation (even after complex sequences) might enhance reliability of traversal or recovery in systems that might drift or go off‐course.

[0] https://github.com/VoxleOne/SpinStep

replies(4): >>45662416 #>>45662420 #>>45665206 #>>45674767 #
meindnoch ◴[] No.45662420[source]
>using a simpler method than computing a full inverse sequence

What are you even talking about? Rotations form a group. Any orientation "A" can be reached from any other orientation "B" with a single rotation. It's an O(1) operation. Always has been. What you wrote makes no sense whatsoever.

replies(1): >>45662596 #
the__alchemist ◴[] No.45662596[source]
#1: BM.

#2: His point is that this could be applied compute that single rotation.

replies(1): >>45662779 #
1. meindnoch ◴[] No.45662779{3}[source]
Makes no sense. Computing the rotation between any two orientations (represented as quaternions) is simply a matter of dividing one quaternion by the other. It's an O(1) operation. It's a non-problem.