Skip to main content

plotting - Geodesics on a torus


Is it possible to draw geodesics between the points in a path on a torus - toroidal surface?


geodesics: generalization of the notion of a "straight line" to "curved spaces"


paths = {{{348.488, 132.622}, {336.333, 63.6857}, {394.365, 24.5422},
          {39.3603, 78.1653}, {109.094, 84.2662}, {170.317, 50.3295},
          {195.403, 115.68}, {263.324, 132.615}, {316.947, 177.61},
          {381.382, 150.259}, {49.8526, 164.812}, {41.3217, 95.3342},

          {11.7384, 158.776}, {65.3616, 113.781}, {5.35985, 77.728},
          {18.7165, 9.01408}, {358.715, 372.961}, {394.767, 312.96},
          {340.367, 268.907}, {313.016, 333.343}, {269.92, 388.503}}};

The plot has some problem because periodic boundary conditions (PBCs).


The plot has some problem because periodic boundary conditions (PBCs).



Answer



I don't know if there's a simple way to find geodesics on a torus, but I can give you a general way to find geodesics on any curved surface.


First, I define the torus:


r = 3;

torus[{u_, v_}] := {Cos[u]*(Sin[v] + r), Sin[u]*(Sin[v] + r), Cos[v]}

My initial attempt was then to use variational methods to derive a formula for geodesics:


Needs["VariationalMethods`"]
eq = EulerEquations[Sqrt[Total[D[torus[{u, v[u]}], u]^2]], v[u], u];

And use ParametricNDSolve & FindRoot to find the right parameters that connect the start and end point on the torus:


geodesic[{{u1_, v1_}, {u2_, v2_}}] := Module[{start, g, sol},
  If[u2 < u1, Return[geodesic[{{u2, v2}, {u1, v1}}]]];
  sol = ParametricNDSolve[Flatten[{

      eq, v[0] == v1, v'[0] == a
      }], v, {u, 0, u2 - u1}, {a}];
  start = a /. FindRoot[Evaluate[(v[a][u2 - u1] - v2 /. sol)], {a, 0}];
  g = v[start] /. sol;
  Function[t, {u1 + t*(u2 - u1), g[t*(u2 - u1)]}]
  ]

So given two points, geodesic will return a function that maps a number $0\leq t\leq 1$ to torus coordinates of the right geodesic:


LocatorPane[
 Dynamic[pts],

 Dynamic[ParametricPlot[Evaluate[geodesic[pts][t]], {t, 0, 1}, 
   PlotRange -> {{-π, π}, {-π, π}}, Axes -> True, 
   AspectRatio -> 1/r]]]

enter image description here


Show[
 ParametricPlot3D[
  torus[{u, v}], {u, -π, π}, {v, -π, π}, 
  PlotStyle -> White, ImageSize -> 500],
 ParametricPlot3D[Evaluate[torus[geodesic[pts][t]]], {t, 0, 1}, 

  PlotStyle -> Red]
 ]

enter image description here


Unfortunately, for some points, FindRoot becomes very slow or doesn't even find the right solution. (In that case, geodesic still returns a proper geodesic, it just doesn't end where you want it to end.)


So my second attempt uses unconstrained minimization, i.e. I optimize N "control points" along a path to get the shortest path, then interpolate between the control points:


Clear[geodesicFindMin]
geodesicFindMin[{p1_, p2_}, nPts_: 25] := 
 Module[{approximatePts, optimizeOffset, optimizeOffsets, direction, 
   normal, pathLength, optimalPath, interpolations, len, solution},

  direction = p2 - p1;
  normal = {{0, 1}, {-1, 0}}.direction;

  approximatePts = Join[
    {p1},
    Table[
     p1 + i*direction/(nPts + 1) + optimizeOffset[i]*normal, {i, 
      nPts}],
    {p2}];


  pathLength = Total[Norm /@ Differences[torus /@ approximatePts]];

  {len, solution} = 
   Quiet[FindMinimum[pathLength, 
     Table[{optimizeOffset[i], 0}, {i, nPts}]]];
  optimalPath = approximatePts /. solution;

  interpolations = 
   ListInterpolation[#, {{0, 1}}] & /@ Transpose[optimalPath];


  Function[t, #[t] & /@ interpolations]
  ]

Usage is the same as before, only this version works much smoother:


LocatorPane[
 Dynamic[pts],
 Dynamic[ParametricPlot[Evaluate[geodesicFindMin[pts][t]], {t, 0, 1}, 
   PlotRange -> {{-π, π}, {-2 π, 2 π}}, Axes -> True, 
   AspectRatio -> 2/r]]]


enter image description here


Show[
 ParametricPlot3D[
  torus[{u, v}], {u, -π, π}, {v, -π, π}, 
  PlotStyle -> Directive[White], ImageSize -> 500],
 ParametricPlot3D[Evaluate[torus[geodesicFindMin[pts][t]]], {t, 0, 1},
   PlotStyle -> Red]
 ]

enter image description here



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more