Duality Mapping Defined
Given a line L in the projective plane, what is its dual point? Draw a line L′ passing through the 2-D origin and perpendicular to line L. Then pick a point P on line L′ on the other side of the origin from line L, such that the distance of point P to the origin is the reciprocal of the distance of line L to the origin.
Expressed algebraically, let g be a one-to-one mapping from the projective plane onto itself:
such that
and
where the L subscript is used to semantically distinguish line coordinates from point coordinates. In words, affine line (m, b) with slope m and y-intercept b is the dual of point (m/b, −1/b). If b=0 then the line passes through the 2-D origin and its dual is the ideal point .
The affine point with Cartesian coordinates (x,y) has as its dual the line whose slope is −x/y and whose y-intercept is −1/y. If the point is the 2-D origin, then its dual is L which is the line at infinity. If the point is, on the x-axis, then its dual is line L which shall be interpreted as a line whose slope is vertical and whose x-intercept is −1/x.
If a point or a line's homogeneous coordinates are represented as a vector in 3x1 matrix form, then the duality mapping g can be represented by a 3x3 matrix
whose inverse is
Matrix G has one real eigenvalue: one, whose eigenvector is . The line L is the y-axis, whose dual is the ideal point which is the intersection of the ideal line with the x-axis.
Notice that L is the y-axis, L is the line at infinity, and L is the x-axis. In 3-space, matrix G is a 90° rotation about the x-axis which turns the y-axis into the z-axis. In projective 2-space, matrix G is a projective transformation which maps points to points, lines to lines, conic sections to conic sections: it exchanges the line at infinity with the x-axis and maps the y-axis onto itself through a Möbius transformation. As a duality, matrix G pairs up each projective line with its dual projective point.
Read more about this topic: Duality (projective Geometry)
Famous quotes containing the word defined:
“There is no such thing as a language, not if a language is anything like what many philosophers and linguists have supposed. There is therefore no such thing to be learned, mastered, or born with. We must give up the idea of a clearly defined shared structure which language-users acquire and then apply to cases.”
—Donald Davidson (b. 1917)