Intereting Posts

Is it mathematically wrong to prove the Intermediate Value Theorem informally?
Proving that $ \gcd(a,b) = as + bt $, i.e., $ \gcd $ is a linear combination.
How do I prove the completeness of $\ell^p$?
Approximation of $e$ using $\pi$ and $\phi$?
Euler's Approximation of pi.
Prove the AGM identity using only Hypergeometric series
How to prove $\prod_{i=1}^{\infty} (1-a_n) = 0$ iff $\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} a_n = \infty$?
How to find a “simple” fraction between two other fractions?
Second-order non-linear ODE
How to find an ellipse, given five points?
On clarifying the relationship between distribution functions in measure theory and probability theory
On inequalities for norms of matrices
$\frac{a+b-2c}{b+c} + \frac{b+c-2a}{c+a} + \frac{c+a-2b}{a+b} \geq 0$
Series Expansion Of An Integral.
How did “one-to-one” come to mean “injective”?

I was trying to figure out, how many degrees of freedoms a $n\times n$-orthogonal matrix posses.The easiest way to determine that seems to be the fact that the matrix exponential of an antisymmetric matrix yields an orthogonal matrix:

$M^T=-M, c=\exp(M) \Rightarrow c^T=c^{-1}$

A antisymmetric matrix possesses $\frac{n(n-1)}{2}$ degrees of freedom.

- Proof of Matrix Norm (Inverse Matrix)
- How do collinear points on a matrix affect its rank?
- Find the eigenvalues of a matrix with ones in the diagonal, and all the other elements equal
- Left ideals of matrix rings are direct sum of column spaces?
- Evaluation of a specific determinant.
- If $A=AB-BA$, is $A$ nilpotent?

BUT: When I also thought about how to parametrize these freedoms explicitly (without the exponential) I remembered, that rotations in $\mathbb{R}^n$ can be parametrized using $n-1$ angles or cosines.

I dont’ understand, where the remaining parameters are hidden?

My guess is, that a orthoganl transformation in $n>3$ can be more complicated than a rotation or that there are different types of rotation (containing reflectiong or such things) and that all the combination of these different types accounts for the rest of the parameters.

Thanks you for your help!

- Determinant of a non-square matrix
- Proving that $\det(A) = 0$ when the columns are linearly dependent
- Can the “inducing” vector norm be deduced or “recovered” from an induced norm?
- Demonstrate using determinant properties that the determinant of matrix “A” is equal to, 2abc(a+b+c)^3
- Show that the eigenvalues of a unitary matrix have modulus $1$
- Diagonalize a symmetric matrix
- Find an orthonormal basis for the subspace of $\mathbb R^4$
- Find unit vector given Roll, Pitch and Yaw
- Relation between cross-product and outer product
- How to show path-connectedness of $GL(n,\mathbb{C})$

The result you remembered is wrong. I am actually not sure what you are referring to. Maybe you are thinking about Euler angles in $3$ dimensions, which are terribly misleading. Each Euler angle should not be thought of as a rotation about a different axis, but as a rotation in a different $2$-dimensional subspace spanned by two axes. The fact that these are the same thing in $3$ dimensions is a consequence of the anomalous identity ${3 \choose 1} = {3 \choose 2}$ (equivalently, the existence of the cross product) and does not hold in higher dimensions.

For example, in four dimensions there are four coordinate axes, say $x, y, z, w$, and ${4 \choose 2} = 6$ Euler angles: $xy$-rotation, $xz$-rotation, $xw$-rotation, $yz$-rotation, $yw$-rotation, $zw$-rotation. So the correct version of this result really does give the correct number of parameters.

Although every rotation will have an matrix which is orthogonal, not every orthogonal matrix is the matrix of a rotation. And you need more than just the angles in the general case to specify a rotation.

In fact, every orthogonal matrix is similar to a block-diagonal matrix, each block $2\times 2$ and at most a $1\times 1$ block; the $2\times 2$ blocks correspond to rotations, and the $1\times 1$ block corresponds either to $1$ or to $-1$ (an identity or a reflection about a codimension $1$ subspace).

Each rotation can be determined by a single angle, (and the $1\times 1$ block gives you a furhter degree of freedom, but this does not actually give you a full fledged “dimension”). But you need more than the angles to specify the rotations, you need to specify the $2$-dimensional subspaces in which they act.

In $\mathbb{R}^3$, you can get away with just three angles because you can determine a single vector with two angles (think spherical coordinates); this gives you the normal vector to the plane of rotation; then specify the angle of rotation, and this gives you the $3 = \frac{3(2)}{2}$ parameters.

But in $\mathbb{R}^n$ with $n\gt 3$, you need to specify the $2$-dimensional subspace and the angle to specify the rotation (and do this enough times). This cannot be determined by a *single* vector plus an angle any more the way it does in $\mathbb{R}^3$, because these planes are no longer codimension $1$ (they cannot be given as “the orthogonal complement to this one-dimensional subspace).

To describe a rotation in $\mathbb{R}^n$ on needs $n(n-1)/2$ parameters, which equals the number of freedoms that a orthogonal matrix possesses.

(To describe a direction in $\mathbb{R}^n$ one needs $n-1$ angles. See http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugelkoordinaten#Verallgemeinerung_auf_n-dimensionale_Kugelkoordinaten)

- Why is $b^x \overset{\mathrm{def}}{=} \sup \left\{ b^t \mid t \in \Bbb Q,\ t \le x \right\}$ for $b > 1$ a sensible definition?
- counting monotonically increasing functions
- Solving linear system of differential equations of 2nd order
- Prove that the largest singular value of a matrix is greater than the largest eigenvalue
- Minimal polynomial over an extension field divides the minimal polynomial over the base field
- Proof of certain Gaussian integral form
- Proof that ${\left(\pi^\pi\right)}^{\pi^\pi}$ (and now $\pi^{\left(\pi^{\pi^\pi}\right)}$ is a noninteger
- Solve $\lim_{x\to 0} \frac{\sin x-x}{x^3}$
- Circles Of Descartes
- Minimal number of moves needed to solve a “Lights Out” variant
- On finding polynomials that approximate a function and its derivative (extensions of Stone-Weierstrass?)
- If a rational function is real on the unit circle, what does that say about its roots and poles?
- Prove that 10101…10101 is NOT a prime.
- Do Kolmogorov's axioms really need only disjointness rather than pairwise disjointness?
- orthonormal system in a Hilbert space