709
2d trulesformations (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by nicknonya@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 101 points 1 month ago

The scaled down rectangle should be narrower; it's not scaled in this diagram, it's squished.

(Yes I know you can 'scale' objects on one axis but that's usually not how it's taught on an introductory level. Standard scaling assumes object similarity, which is not present in the diagram's 'scaled' rectangle.)

[-] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 46 points 1 month ago

This is some quality pedantry.

[-] woodgen@lemm.ee 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Scaling in 2D has 2 parameters, X and Y, in the example X was at 1 while Y was below 1. You are referring to a subset of scaling transformation where X = Y and the aspect ratio is kept.

[-] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago

Yes, and introductory geometry courses teach students how to do uniform scaling far before they teach them axis-based because it's better illustrative of the concepts of similarity and congruence

[-] shundi82@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

And what about the arrow?

It's pointing down diagonally, which - at least to me (and for pretty much any GUI I can think of) - indicates, that it should be affecting both axes.

Then again, that whole illustration isn't all that great to begin with. So who knows, what that arrow is supposed to signify...

[-] Gobbel2000@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago

No, I wod say scaling is any diagonal matrix and thus even includes mirroring.

[-] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Cool, now explain that to a class of 7th graders for me

edit: raised grade, it may been set a low but it varies. I think most kids start to learn this stuff in/around middle school

edit 2: also mirrored objects are generally considered similar so that's fine

[-] chad@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Ackchuawually, this example depicts a squish and a translation. A true scaling would have the scaling being done in place, resulting in an overlayed and smaller rectangle.

[-] germanatlas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago

Damnit, I wanted to say that

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 87 points 1 month ago
[-] lugal@sopuli.xyz 25 points 1 month ago

I honestly needed this comment to get it

[-] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 month ago

For the first time, I caught loss before loss was pointed out to me 😅

[-] tyler@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago

Same lol. I hate this stupid meme, but I felt better about recognizing it in the wild.

[-] 10_0@lemmy.ml 36 points 1 month ago

Is this loss?

[-] xantoxis@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago

In spring, a man plants a tree.
In summer, he plants another.
In the fall, they stood together.
In winter, one fell.

[-] alien@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago

IS THAT LOSS?!!

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Rotation isn't even rotation which implies rotating around a point on that rectangle. That's rotation and translation. Such a loss.

[-] LMagicalus@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 month ago

Rotation doesn't imply the point of rotation is on the rectangle.

[-] needanke@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

Scaling does not include translation either yet it does here by your logic.

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
709 points (96.7% liked)

196

16281 readers
2422 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS