Skip to main content

Ambiguous Objects using Mathematical Functions

 Ambiguous: open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning (according to the Oxford Dictionary). You typically use this adjective in an English or art class rather than a math class because literature and artwork can sometimes have multiple meanings or viewpoints. But not math. Two plus two is always four. The square root of nine is always three. And a function always results in that specific graph. I think that’s why I’ve always had a certain liking to math because it was always direct and to the point with not a lot of room for interpretation. However, by this week’s project, my mind has been blown by the ability to use math functions to create an ambiguous object.

Before we get into the math for the object, I’d also like to point out a real-world example of ambiguous objects, optical illusions. They use the same method that we are going to use by find a shared visual point or line that forces the audience to view one thing or the other. Have you ever been left starting at an optical illusion wondering why you can’t see both options? That’s why.

The goal of this ambiguous object is to view the object from one side to see one function, then view it from the other side to view the other function. But how does that work? We are going to use two functions, their parameterization, and perspective to build this ambiguous object.

First, we start with our two parameterized curves.

 







 






Observer 1 thinks they will see and observer 2 thinks they will see . We assume that each view will be looking at the object at a 45-degree angle and far enough away to treat the entire curve as a specific point. We assume the parameterization of these curves, r(t), will give the floating curve which will allow the object to be seen differently from the two different perspectives. Let’s find an expression for r(t) for the floating curve that will combine the two points of vision for these curves.

We will need to find the equation ra(s) through and parallel to <0,1,1> and the parameterization. We will also need to find the same thing for the second curve; the equation rb(t) through and parallel to <0,-1,1> . The results are and .

We now set these equations equal to each other and solve for the point of intersection.

Then plug s and t back into the parameterizations and get our final parameterization of the floating curve. This will represent our top curve and will form each function depending on the viewpoint.

We continue to build the function into and object.

If you look, you can see what function each observer’s perspective will see. Observer one will see the curve for f(x).


Observer 2 will see the curve for g(x). 


(Note: the rectangle at the bottom is used as a platform for the object and tells the observers to always view it from the longer side.)

I chose this object and these functions because I enjoy working with trig functions as they always surprise me with the different curves they can make. I also wanted to see how two completely different curves would show in a 3D object and how distinct they will be for each viewer. For example, one curve has distinct directional changes and is duplicated in all four quadrants, while the other curve is a single line function. 




 


 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Approximation of a Solid of Revolution

Most math teachers I've had have been able to break down Calculus into two very broad categories: derivatives and integrals. What is truly amazing, is how much you can do with these two tools. By using integration, it is possible to approximate the shape of a 2-D function that is rotated around an axis. This solid created from the rotation is known as a solid of revolution. To explain this concept, we will take a look at the region bounded by the two functions: \[ f(x) = 2^{.25x} - 1 \] and \[ g(x) = e^{.25x} - 1 \] bounded at the line y = 1. This region is meant to represent a cross section of a small bowl. While it may not perfectly represent this practical object, the approximation will be quite textured, and will provide insight into how the process works. The region bounded by the two functions can be rotated around the y-axis to create a fully solid object. This is easy enough to talk about, but what exactly does this new solid look like? Is...

Solids of Revolution Revisited

Introduction In my previous blog post on solids of revolution, we looked at the object formed by rotating the area between \(f(x) = -\frac{1}{9}x^2+\frac{3}{4} \) and \( g(x)=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2}e^{-x} \) around the \( x \) axis and bounded by \( x = 0 \) and \( x = 1.5 \). When this solid is approximated using 10 washers, the resulting object looks like this: When I was looking back over the 3D prints I’d created for this course, I noticed that the print for this example was the least interesting of the bunch. Looking at the print now, I feel like the shape is rather uninteresting. The curve I chose has such a gradual slope that each of the washers are fairly similar in size and causes the overall shape to just look like a cylinder. Since calculating the changes in the radiuses of the washers is a big part of the washer method, I don’t think this slowly decreasing curve was the best choice to illustrate the concept. The reason I had done this o...

Finding the Center of Mass of a Toy Boat

Consider two people who visit the gym a substantial amount. One is a girl who loves to lift weights and bench press as much as she possibly can. The other is a guy who focuses much more on his legs, trying to break the world record for squat weight. It just so happens that these two are the same height and have the exact same weight, but the center of their weight is not in the same part of their body. This is because the girl has much more weight in the top half of her body and the boy has more weight in the bottom half. This difference in center of mass is a direct result of the different distributions of mass throughout both of their bodies. Moments and Mass There are two main components to finding the center of mass of an object. The first, unsurprisingly, is the mass of the whole object. In this case of the boat example, the mass will be uniform throughout the entire object. This is ideal a majority of the time as it drastically reduces the difficulty...