Zelaron Gaming Forum  
Register Stats Arcade Portal Forum FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Zelaron Gaming Forum > The Zelaron Nexus > Science and Art

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

 
Determining if a complex number w = f(z1, z2, z3) is a known triangle center
Reply
Posted 2018-11-23, 09:53 AM
I've found a number of closely related functions, each of which takes three complex numbers , and (which we can consider as the vertices of a triangle) as its arguments, and outputs a complex number . A few of these functions represent well-known triangle centers , such as the centroid (that is, ), or the zeros and critical points of the polynomial . Other functions among them are less obvious, such as the following point :




As far as I can tell, by comparing the point to different triangle centers in GeoGebra Classic 6, it seems to be the first isodynamic point to a high degree of precision for all triangles that I've thrown at it so far. My problem is twofold:


How do I prove that is (or isn't) the first isodynamic point of the triangle ?

How do I (numerically) match with likely triangle centers based on the Encyclopedia of Triangle Centers? GeoGebra uses a small portion of the material in the ETC, but unfortunately, it fails to implement some important triangle centers with low indices. Suggestions for other, similar resources are welcome, too.


As for , I think a viable starting point might be to convert into barycentric or normalized trilinear coordinates and directly compare the result to the coordinates given in the ETC, but I'm not sure how to do this. It seems to be slightly easier to use Cartesian coordinates as a starting point, but Mathematica (for example) generally doesn't seem to be very inclined to return the real and imaginary parts of (for general , e.g. when you let for real numbers and simplify the expressions).


Regarding , the following website can supposedly be used to compare points to almost all entries in the ETC: https://faculty.evansville.edu/ck6/e...ch_6_9_13.html


Unfortunately, I seem to get inconsistent results from my attempts to implement the algorithm on the website above in Mathematica. More specifically, certain triangle centers that I've tested (such as the centroid) yield the correct coordinates in the list, while other obvious ones that I've tested are either not listed, or have the wrong index. I suspect that I've misunderstood the information on the website in some elementary way, so feel free to correct my algorithm (for above, in the example that follows):


Choose as the vertices of a triangle with side lengths and , e.g. and .


Solve the following linear system of equations for :





where are the barycentric coordinates for . (Here, can be approximated to a high degree of precision, e.g. to avoid problems with Mathematica...)


Let , and (or, more ideally, just use the Pythagorean theorem...), and define . Furthermore, calculate the area of the triangle as .


Calculate , which should be the sought "coordinate" in the table.


Carrying out the algorithm above yields , whereas the coordinate for the first isodynamic point (with index in the table) is . Perhaps isn't actually the first isodynamic point, but I like to think that I've done something wrong...
"Stephen Wolfram is the creator of Mathematica and is widely regarded as the most important innovator in scientific and technical computing today." - Stephen Wolfram

Last edited by Chruser; 2018-11-23 at 12:11 PM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Chruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed it
 
 
Chruser
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-11-23, 03:53 PM in reply to Chruser's post "Determining if a complex number w =..."
Why do you do this
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution
 
 
-Spector-
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-11-23, 11:11 PM in reply to -Spector-'s post starting "Why do you do this"
-Spector- said: [Goto]
Why do you do this

Some people just don't understand the dangers of indiscriminate surveillance.
"Stephen Wolfram is the creator of Mathematica and is widely regarded as the most important innovator in scientific and technical computing today." - Stephen Wolfram
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Chruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed itChruser shouldn't have fed it
 
 
Chruser
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-12-02, 10:15 AM in reply to Chruser's post starting "Some people just don't understand the..."
I discovered this the other day:

9 squared = 81, 9% of 9 is .81
8 squared = 64, 8% of 8 i .64
7 squared = 49, 7% of 7 is .49
6 squared = 36, 6% of 6 is .36
....


So there's that


[Fixed my fuck up - thanks for outlining my flaws, K_A (dick)]

Last edited by -Spector-; 2018-12-03 at 04:50 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution
 
 
-Spector-
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-12-02, 06:26 PM in reply to -Spector-'s post starting "I discovered this the other day: 9..."
-Spector- said:
6 squared = 36, 6% of 36 is .36
Check your math, buddy.

Anyway, the pattern you are displaying is a fairly obvious one. 9^2=9*9=81 whereas 9%*9=0.09*9=0.81. 0.09 is two orders of magnitude smaller than 9, which is why the answer also ends up being two orders of magnitude smaller (81 vs 0.81).
D3V: I need to get on zelaron more. I'm having withdrawls.
Skurai: You should be used to withdrawls by now, D3V.
!King_Amazon!: It's "withdrawals" you illiterate douchebags
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics
 
!King_Amazon!
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-12-02, 07:05 PM in reply to !King_Amazon!'s post starting "Check your math, buddy. Anyway, the..."
Oh I realize how basic it is, its just fun to find patterns. Can you point out which part of my math I need to check? When I do 6^2 I get 36. When I do 6 * .06 I get .36
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution
 
 
-Spector-
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-12-02, 09:35 PM in reply to -Spector-'s post starting "Oh I realize how basic it is, its just..."
-Spector- said: [Goto]
Oh I realize how basic it is, its just fun to find patterns. Can you point out which part of my math I need to check? When I do 6^2 I get 36. When I do 6 * .06 I get .36
That is correct, but not what you wrote above.

Quote:
6 squared = 36, 6% of 36 is .36
D3V: I need to get on zelaron more. I'm having withdrawls.
Skurai: You should be used to withdrawls by now, D3V.
!King_Amazon!: It's "withdrawals" you illiterate douchebags
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics!King_Amazon! simplifies with no grasp of the basics
 
!King_Amazon!
 



 
Reply
Posted 2018-12-03, 04:47 AM in reply to !King_Amazon!'s post starting "That is correct, but not what you wrote..."
Fuck .
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution-Spector- is the result of 14 billion years of hydrogen atom evolution
 
 
-Spector-
 
 

Bookmarks

Tags
compass, complex analysis, geometry, math, straight-edge

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules [Forum Rules]
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
23 D3V General Discussion 10 2007-07-30 03:06 PM
Where did Penguin go wrong? Penguin General Discussion 7 2004-06-06 10:26 AM
ANARCHY COOKBOOK VERSION 2000 - 2006, part 1 blckshdwdragon General Discussion 0 2003-01-15 08:30 PM
Game Shark Code For PS2 HLomegasin General Gaming 116 2002-05-05 12:37 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:50 AM.
'Synthesis 2' vBulletin 3.x styles and 'x79' derivative
by WetWired the Unbound and Chruser
Copyright ©2002-2008 zelaron.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is best seen with your eyes open.