1 / 21

# Differential geometry II - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Differential geometry II. Lecture 2. © Alexander & Michael Bronstein tosca.cs.technion.ac.il/book. Numerical geometry of non-rigid shapes Stanford University, Winter 2009. Intrinsic & extrinsic geometry. First fundamental form describes completely the intrinsic geometry .

Related searches for Differential geometry II

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Differential geometry II' - koen

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Lecture 2

tosca.cs.technion.ac.il/book

Numerical geometry of non-rigid shapes

Stanford University, Winter 2009

• First fundamental form describes completely the intrinsic geometry.

• Second fundamental form describes completely the extrinsic

• geometry – the “layout” of the shape in ambient space.

• First fundamental form is invariant to isometry.

• Second fundamental form is invariant to rigid motion (congruence).

• If and are congruent (i.e., ), then

• they have identical intrinsic and extrinsic geometries.

• Fundamental theorem: a map preserving the first and the second

• fundamental forms is a congruence.

• Said differently: an isometry preserving second fundamental form is a

• restriction of Euclidean isometry.

• Our definition of intrinsic geometry (first fundamental form) relied so far

• on ambient space.

• Can we think of our surface as of an abstract manifold immersed

• nowhere?

• What ingredients do we really need?

• Smooth two-dimensional manifold

• Tangent space at each point.

• Inner product

• These ingredients do not require any ambient space!

• Riemannian metric: bilinear symmetric

• positive definite smooth map

• Abstract inner product on tangent space

• of an abstract manifold.

• Coordinate-free.

• In parametrization coordinates is

• expressed as first fundamental form.

• A farewell to extrinsic geometry!

Bernhard Riemann

(1826-1866)

• We have two alternatives to define the intrinsic metric using the path

• length.

• Extrinsic definition:

• Intrinsic definition:

• The second definition appears more general.

• Embedding theorem (Nash, 1956): any

• Riemannian metric can be realized as an

• embedded surface in Euclidean space of

• sufficiently high yet finite dimension.

• Technical conditions:

• Manifold is

• For an -dimensional manifold,

• embedding space dimension is

• Practically:intrinsic and extrinsic views are equivalent!

John Forbes Nash

(born 1928)

• Nash’s theorem guarantees existence of embedding.

• It does not guarantee uniqueness.

• Embedding is clearly defined up to a congruence.

• Are there cases of non-trivial non-uniqueness?

• Formally:

• Given an abstract Riemannian manifold , and an embedding

• , does there exist another embedding

• such that and are incongruent?

• Said differently:

• Do isometric yet incongruent shapes exist?

• Shapes admitting incongruent isometries are called bendable.

• Plane is the simplest example of a bendable surface.

• Bending: an isometric deformation transforming into .

• Existence of two incongruent isometries does not

• guarantee that can be physically folded into without

• the need to cut or glue.

• If there exists a family of bendings continuous

• w.r.t. such that and , the

• shapes are called continuously bendable or applicable.

• Shapes that do not have incongruent isometries are rigid.

• Extrinsic geometry of a rigid shape is fully determined by

• the intrinsic one.

• Subsets of the plane:

• Second fundamental form vanishes

• everywhere

• Isometric shapes and have identical

• first and second fundamental forms

• Fundamental theorem: and are

• congruent.

Flatland is rigid!

If the faces of a polyhedron were made of metal plates and the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

Rigidity conjecture

In practical applications shapes are represented as polyhedra (triangular meshes), so…

Leonhard Euler

(1707-1783)

Do non-rigid shapes really exist?

Rigidity conjecture timeline the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

Euler’s Rigidity Conjecture: every polyhedron is rigid

1766

Cauchy: every convex polyhedron is rigid

1813

Cohn-Vossen: all surfaces with positive Gaussian curvature are rigid

1927

Gluck: almost all simply connected surfaces are rigid

1974

Connelly finally disproves Euler’s conjecture

1977

Connelly sphere the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

Isocahedron

Rigid polyhedron

Connelly sphere

Non-rigid polyhedron

Connelly, 1978

“Almost rigidity” the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Most of the shapes (especially, polyhedra) are rigid.

• This may give the impression that the world is more rigid than non-rigid.

• This is probably true, if isometry is considered in the strict sense

• Many objects have some elasticity and therefore can bend almost

• Isometrically

• No known results about “almost rigidity” of shapes.

Gaussian curvature – a second look the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Gaussian curvature measures how a shape is different from a plane.

• We have seen two definitions so far:

• Product of principal curvatures:

• Determinant of shape operator:

• Both definitions are extrinsic.

• Here is another one:

• For a sufficiently small , perimeter

• of a metric ball of radius is given by

Gaussian curvature – a second look the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Riemannian metric is locally Euclidean up to second order.

• Third order error is controlled by Gaussian curvature.

• Gaussian curvature

• measures the defect of the perimeter, i.e., how

• is different from the Euclidean .

• positively-curved surface – perimeter smaller than Euclidean.

• negatively-curved surface – perimeter larger than Euclidean.

Theorema egregium the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Our new definition of Gaussian curvature is

• intrinsic!

• Gauss’ Remarkable Theorem

• In modern words:

• Gaussian curvature is invariant to isometry.

…formula itaque sponte perducit ad egregium theorema: si superficies curva in quamcunque aliam superficiem explicatur, mensura curvaturae in singulis punctis invariata manet.

Karl Friedrich Gauss

(1777-1855)

An Italian connection… the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

Intrinsic invariants the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Gaussian curvature is a local invariant.

• Isometry invariant descriptor of shapes.

• Problems:

• Second-order quantity – sensitive

• to noise.

• Local quantity – requires

• correspondence between shapes.

Gauss-Bonnet formula the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

• Solution: integrate Gaussian curvature over

• the whole shape

• is Euler characteristic.

• Related genus by

• Stronger topological rather than

• geometric invariance.

• Result known as Gauss-Bonnet formula.

Pierre Ossian Bonnet

(1819-1892)

Intrinsic invariants the polyhedron edges were replaced by hinges, the polyhedron would be rigid.

We all have the same Euler characteristic .

• Too crude a descriptor to discriminate between shapes.

• We need more powerful tools.