1 Jul 2011 05:57
Re: turning number revisited
Dan Luecking <luecking <at> uark.edu>
2011-07-01 03:57:46 GMT
2011-07-01 03:57:46 GMT
At 06:54 AM 6/30/2011, you wrote:
>I believe I'm blind or silly or I completely mistunderstand you both
>(Dan and Larry) -- I cannot see the (simple) relation between cubic
>and its derivative quadratic ... Assume, for example, that we have
>a square ABCD, and that its sides are approximated by "canonical"
>cubic splines (represented in MF/MP by the "--" operator), which,
>in this case, are just linear functions:
> A + (B-A)*t for t in [0,1]
> B + (C-B)*(t-1) for t in [1,2]
> C + (D-C)*(t-2) for t in [2,3]
> D + (A-D)*(t-3) for t in [3,4]
>Therefore, its derivative is:
> B-A for t in (0,1) (observe that the intervals now are open)
> C-B for t in (1,2)
> D-C for t in (2,3)
> A-D for t in (3,4)
>so, the derivative of the original curve is constant
>over the interior of the intervals and undefined at
>their ends...
But Larry's construction of the differentiated path added
line segments corresponding to those places where the derivative
is discontinuous. For this example the differentiated path becomes
(B-A)--(C-B)--(D-C)--(A-D)--cycle.
For a general
p = <cubic> & <cubic> & ...
(Continue reading)
RSS Feed