how do you reflect a vector over another vector? - actionscript-3

I'm using AS3 to program some collision detection for a flash game and am having trouble figuring out how to bounce a ball off of a line. I keep track of a vector that represents the ball's 2D velocity and I'm trying to reflect it over the vector that is perpendicular to the line that the ball's colliding with (aka the normal). My problem is that I don't know how to figure out the new vector (that's reflected over the normal). I figured that you can use Math.atan2 to find the difference between the normal and the ball's vector but I'm not sure how to expand that to solve my problem.

Vector algebra - You want the "bounce" vector:
vec1 is the ball's motion vector and vec2 is the surface/line vector:
// 1. Find the dot product of vec1 and vec2
// Note: dx and dy are vx and vy divided over the length of the vector (magnitude)
var dpA:Number = vec1.vx * vec2.dx + vec1.vy * vec2.dy;
// 2. Project vec1 over vec2
var prA_vx:Number = dpA * vec2.dx;
var prA_vy:Number = dpA * vec2.dy;
// 3. Find the dot product of vec1 and vec2's normal
// (left or right normal depending on line's direction, let's say left)
var dpB:Number = vec1.vx * vec2.leftNormal.dx + vec1.vy * vec2.leftNormal.dy;
// 4. Project vec1 over vec2's left normal
var prB_vx:Number = dpB * vec2.leftNormal.dx;
var prB_vy:Number = dpB * vec2.leftNormal.dy;
// 5. Add the first projection prA to the reverse of the second -prB
var new_vx:Number = prA_vx - prB_vx;
var new_vy:Number = prA_vy - prB_vy;
Assign those velocities to your ball's motion vector and let it bounce.
PS:
vec.leftNormal --> vx = vec.vy; vy = -vec.vx;
vec.rightNormal --> vx = -vec.vy; vy = vec.vx;

The mirror reflection of any vector v from a line/(hyper-)surface with normal n in any dimension can be computed using projection tensors. The parallel projection of v on n is: v|| = (v . n) n = v . nn. Here nn is the outer (or tensor) product of the normal with itself. In Cartesian coordinates it is a matrix with elements: nn[i,j] = n[i]*n[j]. The perpendicular projection is just the difference between the original vector and its parallel projection: v - v||. When the vector is reflected, its parallel projection is reversed while the perpendicular projection is retained. So the reflected vector is:
v' = -v|| + (v - v||) = v - 2 v|| = v . (I - 2 nn) = v . R( n ), where
R( n ) = I - 2 nn
(I is the identity tensor which in Cartesian coordinates is simply the diagonal identity matrix diag(1))
R is called the reflection tensor. In Cartesian coordinates it is a real symmetric matrix with components R[i,j] = delta[i,j] - 2*n[i]*n[j], where delta[i,j] = 1 if i == j and 0 otherwise. It is also symmetric with respect to n:
R( -n ) = I - 2(-n)(-n) = I - 2 nn = R( n )
Hence it doesn't matter if one uses the outward facing or the inward facing normal n - the result would be the same.
In two dimensions and Cartesian coordinates, R (the matrix representation of R) becomes:
[ R00 R01 ] [ 1.0-2.0*n.x*n.x -2.0*n.x*n.y ]
R = [ ] = [ ]
[ R10 R11 ] [ -2.0*n.x*n.y 1.0-2.0*n.y*n.y ]
The components of the reflected vector are then computed as a row-vector-matrix product:
v1.x = v.x*R00 + v.y*R10
v1.y = v.x*R01 + v.y*R11
or after expansion:
k = 2.0*(v.x*n.x + v.y*n.y)
v1.x = v.x - k*n.x
v1.y = v.y - k*n.y
In three dimensions:
k = 2.0*(v.x*n.x + v.y*n.y + v.z*n.z)
v1.x = v.x - k*n.x
v1.y = v.y - k*n.y
v1.z = v.z - k*n.z
Finding the exact point where the ball will hit the line/wall is more involved - see here.

Calculate two components of the vector.
One component will be the projection of your vector onto the reflecting surface the other component will be the projection on to the surface's normal (which you say you already have). Use dot products to get the projections. Add these two components together by summing the two vectors. You'll have your answer.
You can even calculate the second component A2 as being the original vector minus the first component, so: A2 = A - A1. And then the vector you want is A1 plus the reflected A2 (which is simply -A2 since its perpendicular to your surface) or:
Ar = A1-A2
or
Ar = 2A1 - A which is the same as Ar = -(2A2 - A)
If [Ax,Bx] is your balls velocity and [Wx,Wy] is a unit vector representing the wall:
A1x = (Ax*Wx+Ay*Wy)*Wx;
A1y = (Ax*Wx+Ay*Wy)*Wy;
Arx = 2*A1x - Ax;
Ary = 2*A1y - Ay;

Related

Surfaces with different colormaps

How can multiple surfaces be plotted on the axes but surfaces uses a different colormap?.
Using colormap("...") changes it for the entire figure, not just a single surface.
Thanks
Do You mean on same axes?
I haven't found a function that does this directly. But it is possible to pass the desired colors in the surf function.
Way I found:
Convert the data to a 0-1 scale and then convert to the desired colormap.
Example with hot and jet colormaps:
tx = ty = linspace (-8, 8, 41)';
[xx, yy] = meshgrid (tx, ty);
r = sqrt (xx .^ 2 + yy .^ 2) + eps;
tz = sin (r) ./ r ;
function normalized = normalize_01(data)
data_min = min(min(data))
data_max = max(max(data))
normalized = (data - data_min)/(data_max - data_min)
endfunction
function rgb = data2rgb(data, color_bits, cmap)
grays = normalize_01(data)
indexes = gray2ind(grays, color_bits)
rgb = ind2rgb(indexes, cmap)
endfunction
color_bits = 128
cmap_1 = hot(color_bits)
rgb_1 = data2rgb(tz, color_bits, cmap_1)
surf(tx, ty, tz, rgb_1)
hold on
cmap_2 = jet(color_bits)
rgb_2 = data2rgb(tz+3, color_bits, cmap_2)
surf(tx, ty, tz+3, rgb_2)
But if you also need a colorbar, this way might not be useful. Unless you find a way to manually add two colorbar like I did with the cmap.

get skew or rotation value from affine transformation matrix

I'm trying to get the skew values out of a transformation matrix in a flash movie clip. The transformation matrix is represented by
a b tx
c d ty
0 0 1
I have no information on what kind of transformation is performed and which comes first. I do know that in flash, you may only rotate OR skew a movie clip (correct me if I am wrong). I can get scale values from scaleX and scaleY properties of the movie clip. I believe translation does not quite matter i can just equate tx and ty to zero.
so my question has 2 parts. How do I determine if a skew or a rotation had been applied, and how do I get the respective values?
The 2D rotation matrix is
cos(theta) -sin(theta)
sin(theta) cos(theta)
so if you have no scaling or shear applied,
a = d
and
c = -b
and the angle of rotation is
theta = asin(c) = acos(a)
If you've got scaling applied and can recover the scaling factors sx and sy, just divide the first row by sx and the second by sy in your original transformation matrix and then recover the rotation angle as above.
If you've got a shear (skew) applied anywhere in there, I'm with the previous commenters, it might not be possible except in very limited cases (such as shear in only one known direction at a time and in a known order).
You need to do a polar decomposition. This Wikipedia article explains how it works:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_decomposition
Here is the code I wrote for my own program using the OpenCV library.
const double PI = 3.141592653;
cv::Mat rotationOutput = cv::Mat::zeros(warp00.size(),CV_64F);
cv::Mat_<double>::iterator rotIter = rotationOutput.begin<double>();
cv::Mat_<double>::iterator warp00Iter = warp00.begin<double>();
cv::Mat_<double>::iterator warp01Iter = warp01.begin<double>();
cv::Mat_<double>::iterator warp10Iter = warp10.begin<double>();
cv::Mat_<double>::iterator warp11Iter = warp11.begin<double>();
for(; warp00Iter != warp00.end<double>(); ++warp00Iter, ++warp01Iter, ++warp10Iter,
++warp11Iter, ++rotIter){
cv::Matx22d fMatrix(*warp00Iter,*warp01Iter, *warp10Iter, *warp11Iter);
cv::Matx22d cMatrix;
cv::Matx22d cMatSqrt(0.,0.,0.,0.);
cv::mulTransposed(fMatrix, cMatrix, true);
cv::Matx21d eigenVals;
cv::Matx22d eigenVecs;
if((cMatrix(0,0) !=0.) && (cMatrix(1,1) !=0.)){
if(cv::eigen(cMatrix,true,eigenVals,eigenVecs)){
cMatSqrt = eigenVecs.t()*
cv::Matx22d(sqrt(eigenVals(0,0)),0.,0.,sqrt(eigenVals(1,0)))*eigenVecs;
}
}
cv::Matx22d rMat = fMatrix*cMatSqrt.inv();
*rotIter = atan(rMat(1,0)/rMat(0,0));
}
warp00, warp01, warp10 and warp11 contains the first 4 params of the affine transform (translation params warp02 and warp12 are not needed). IN your case it would be a,b,c,d.
You'll notice in the wikipedia article that you need to compute the square root of a matrix. The only way to do so is by computing the eigen values, then compute their square roots and rotate the diagonal matrix back to the original coordinate system.
It's complicated, but it is the only way to compute the rotations when you have an affine transform.
In my case, I only cared about the rotations, so my code won't give you the skew.
The term for this is matrix decomposition. Here is a solution that includes skew as described by Frédéric Wang.
Works when transforms are applied in this order: skew, scale, rotate, translate.
function decompose_2d_matrix(mat) {
var a = mat[0];
var b = mat[1];
var c = mat[2];
var d = mat[3];
var e = mat[4];
var f = mat[5];
var delta = a * d - b * c;
let result = {
translation: [e, f],
rotation: 0,
scale: [0, 0],
skew: [0, 0],
};
// Apply the QR-like decomposition.
if (a != 0 || b != 0) {
var r = Math.sqrt(a * a + b * b);
result.rotation = b > 0 ? Math.acos(a / r) : -Math.acos(a / r);
result.scale = [r, delta / r];
result.skew = [Math.atan((a * c + b * d) / (r * r)), 0];
} else if (c != 0 || d != 0) {
var s = Math.sqrt(c * c + d * d);
result.rotation =
Math.PI / 2 - (d > 0 ? Math.acos(-c / s) : -Math.acos(c / s));
result.scale = [delta / s, s];
result.skew = [0, Math.atan((a * c + b * d) / (s * s))];
} else {
// a = b = c = d = 0
}
return result;
}
First, you can do both skew and rotate, but you have to select the order first. A skew matrix is explained here, to add a skew matrix to a transformation you create a new matrix and do yourTransformMatrix.concat(skewMatrix);
I can't currently say if you can retrieve values for transformation in terms of "rotation angle", "skew_X angle", "skew_Y angle", "translation_X","translation_Y", this in general is a nonlinear equation system which might not have a solution for a specific matrix.

Bezier Curve always the same length

I'm working on a game in HTML5 canvas.
I want is draw an S-shaped cubic bezier curve between two points, but I'm looking for a way to calculate the coordinates of the control points so that the curve itself is always the same length no matter how close those points are, until it reaches the point where the curve becomes a straight line.
This is solvable numerically. I assume you have a cubic bezier with 4 control points.
at each step you have the first (P0) and last (P3) points, and you want to calculate P1 and P2 such that the total length is constant.
Adding this constraint removes one degree of freedom so we have 1 left (started with 4, determined the end points (-2) and the constant length is another -1). So you need to decide about that.
The bezier curve is a polynomial defined between 0 and 1, you need to integrate on the square root of the sum of elements (2d?). for a cubic bezier, this means a sqrt of a 6 degree polynomial, which wolfram doesn't know how to solve. But if you have all your other control points known (or known up to a dependency on some other constraint) you can have a save table of precalculated values for that constraint.
Is it really necessary that the curve is a bezier curve? Fitting two circular arcs whose total length is constant is much easier. And you will always get an S-shape.
Fitting of two circular arcs:
Let D be the euclidean distance between the endpoints. Let C be the constant length that we want. I got the following expression for b (drawn in the image):
b = sqrt(D*sin(C/4)/4 - (D^2)/16)
I haven't checked if it is correct so if someone gets something different, leave a comment.
EDIT: You should consider the negative solution too that I obtain when solving the equation and check which one is correct.
b = -sqrt(D*sin(C/4)/4 - (D^2)/16)
Here's a working example in SVG that's close to correct:
http://phrogz.net/svg/constant-length-bezier.xhtml
I experimentally determined that when the endpoints are on top of one another the handles should be
desiredLength × cos(30°)
away from the handles; and (of course) when the end points are at their greatest distance the handles should be on top of one another. Plotting all ideal points looks sort of like an ellipse:
The blue line is the actual ideal equation, while the red line above is an ellipse approximating the ideal. Using the equation for the ellipse (as my example above does) allows the line to get about 9% too long in the middle.
Here's the relevant JavaScript code:
// M is the MoveTo command in SVG (the first point on the path)
// C is the CurveTo command in SVG:
// C.x is the end point of the path
// C.x1 is the first control point
// C.x2 is the second control point
function makeFixedLengthSCurve(path,length){
var dx = C.x - M.x, dy = C.y - M.y;
var len = Math.sqrt(dx*dx+dy*dy);
var angle = Math.atan2(dy,dx);
if (len >= length){
C.x = M.x + 100 * Math.cos(angle);
C.y = M.y + 100 * Math.sin(angle);
C.x1 = M.x; C.y1 = M.y;
C.x2 = C.x; C.y2 = C.y;
}else{
// Ellipse of major axis length and minor axis length*cos(30°)
var a = length, b = length*Math.cos(30*Math.PI/180);
var handleDistance = Math.sqrt( b*b * ( 1 - len*len / (a*a) ) );
C.x1 = M.x + handleDistance * Math.sin(angle);
C.y1 = M.y - handleDistance * Math.cos(angle);
C.x2 = C.x - handleDistance * Math.sin(angle);
C.y2 = C.y + handleDistance * Math.cos(angle);
}
}

AS3 - Y Velocity 6.123031769111886E-17

When given 0,0 to 0,5, the y velocity becomes that number and breaks my code. I know I must have done something wrong as I just copy and pasted code (since I am horrible at maths)..
This is how I calculate the numbers:
var radian = Math.atan2(listOfNodes[j].y - listOfNodes[i].y,listOfNodes[j].x - listOfNodes[i].x);
var vy = Math.cos(radian);
var vx = Math.sin(radian);
Thanks
There i am assuming the velocity vector is FROM 0,0 TO 0,5. And 0,0 is i and 0,5 is j.
In that case the velocity vector is only along y and the y component should be 5 and x component 0. It is coming as opposite because,
cos(radian) whould be x velocity component and sin(radian) the y compunent.
And the number 6.123031769111886E-17 is actually returned in place of 0.
Look at the following figure:
Also as can be seen from the figure you do not need the trigonometric computations at all.
You can simply get the x and y components as follows:
// y2 - y1
var vy = listOfNodes[j].y - listOfNodes[i].y;
// x2 - x1
var vx = listOfNodes[j].x - listOfNodes[i].x;
This will avoid the floating point inaccuracy caused by the trig finctions due to which you are seeing 6.123031769111886E-17 instead of 0.
You only need to use atan2 if you actually need the angle θ in your code.
Update:
Well if you need only unit (normalized) vector's components you can divide the vx and vy with the length of the original vector. Like this:
// y2 - y1
var vy = listOfNodes[j].y - listOfNodes[i].y;
// x2 - x1
var vx = listOfNodes[j].x - listOfNodes[i].x;
// vector magnitude
var mag = Math.sqrt(vx * vx + vy * vy);
// get unit vector components
vy /= mag;
vx /= mag;
Using the above you will get the exactly the same results as you are getting from trig sin and cos functions.
But if you still need to use the original code and want to make 6.12...E-17 compare to 0, you can use the epsilon technique for comparing floats. So you can compare any value within epsilon's range from 0, using flllowing code:
function floatCompare(a:Number, b:Number, epsilon:Number):Boolean{
return (a >= (b - epsilon) && a <= (b + epsilon));
}
// To check for zero use this code, here i'm using 0.0001 as epsilon
if(floatCompare(vx, 0, 0.0001)){
// code here
}
So any deviation in the range of [b-epsilon, b+epsilon] would successfully compare to b. This is essential in case of floating point arithmetic.

Correct solution for this tensor

I'm implementing the system in this paper and I've come a little unstuck correctly implementing the radial tensor field.
All tensors in this system are of the form given on page 3, section 4
R [ cos(2t), sin(2t); sin(2t), -cos(2t) ]
The radial tensor field is defined as:
R [ yy - xx, -2xy; -2xy, -(yy-xx) ]
In my system I'm only storing R and Theta, since I can calculate the tensor based off just that information. This means I need to calculate R and Theta for the radial tensor. Unfortunately, my attempts at this have failed. Although it looks correct, my solution fails in the top left and bottom right quadrants.
Addendum: Following on from discussion in the comments about the image of the system not working, I'll put some hard numbers here too.
The entire tensor field is 800x480, the center point is at { 400, 240 }, and we're using the standard graphics coordinate system with a negative y axis (ie. origin in the top left).
At { 400, 240 }, the tensor is R = 0, T = 0
At { 200, 120 }, the tensor is R = 2.95936E+9, T = 2.111216
At { 600, 120 }, the tensor is R = 2.95936E+9, T = 1.03037679
I can easily sample any more points which you think may help.
The code I'm using to calculate values is:
float x = i - center.X;
float xSqr = x * x;
float y = j - center.Y;
float ySqr = y * y;
float r = (float)Math.Pow(xSqr + ySqr, 2);
float theta = (float)Math.Atan2((-2 * x * y), (ySqr - xSqr)) / 2;
if (theta < 0)
theta += MathHelper.Pi;
Evidently you are comparing formulas (1) and (2) of the paper. Note the scalar multiple l = || (u_x,u_y) || in formula (1), and identify that with R early in the section. This factor is implicit in formula (2), so to make them match we have to factor R out.
Formula (2) works with an offset from the "center" (x0,y0) of the radial map:
x = xp - x0
y = yp - y0
to form the given 2x2 matrix:
y^2 - x^2 -2xy
-2xy -(y^2 - x^2)
We need to factor out a scalar R from this matrix to get a traceless orthogonal 2x2 matrix as in formula (1):
cos(2t) sin(2t)
sin(2t) -cos(2t)
Since cos^2(2t) + sin^2(2t) = 1 the factor R can be identified as:
R = (y^2 - x^2)^2 + (-2xy)^2 = (x^2 + y^2)^2
leaving a traceless orthogonal 2x2 matrix:
C S
S -C
from which the angle 'tan(2t) = S/C` can be extracted by an inverse trig function.
Well, almost. As belisarius warns, we need to check that angle t is in the correct quadrant. The authors of the paper write at the beginning of Sec. 4 that their "t" (which refers to the tensor) depends on R >= 0 and theta (your t) lying in [0,2pi) according to the formula R [ cos(2t), sin(2t); sin(2t) -cos(2t) ].
Since sine and cosine have period 2pi, t (theta) is only uniquely determined up to an interval of length pi. I suspect the authors meant to write either that 2t lies in [0,2pi) or more simply that t lies in [0,pi). belisarius suggestion to use "the atan2 equivalent" will avoid any division by zero. We may (if the function returns a negative value) need to add pi so that t >= 0. This amounts to adding 2pi to 2t, so it doesn't affect the signs of the entries in the traceless orthogonal matrix (since 'R >= 0` the pattern of signs should agree in formulas (1) and (2) ).