Rotation of axes by 45 degrees












3














I was reading a book in which it is mentioned that:



Rotate coordinate axes by $45$ degrees so that a point $(x,y)$ becomes $(x+y,y-x)$ .



Here is image 1



Here is image 2



I can't understand how the new coordinates became $(x+y,y-x)$ .
If I apply the formula for rotation of axes I'll get $sqrt{2}$ $(x-y, x+y) $.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago










  • Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
    – Martín Vacas Vignolo
    8 hours ago










  • @MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago






  • 3




    @MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago










  • youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago
















3














I was reading a book in which it is mentioned that:



Rotate coordinate axes by $45$ degrees so that a point $(x,y)$ becomes $(x+y,y-x)$ .



Here is image 1



Here is image 2



I can't understand how the new coordinates became $(x+y,y-x)$ .
If I apply the formula for rotation of axes I'll get $sqrt{2}$ $(x-y, x+y) $.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago










  • Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
    – Martín Vacas Vignolo
    8 hours ago










  • @MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago






  • 3




    @MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago










  • youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago














3












3








3







I was reading a book in which it is mentioned that:



Rotate coordinate axes by $45$ degrees so that a point $(x,y)$ becomes $(x+y,y-x)$ .



Here is image 1



Here is image 2



I can't understand how the new coordinates became $(x+y,y-x)$ .
If I apply the formula for rotation of axes I'll get $sqrt{2}$ $(x-y, x+y) $.










share|cite|improve this question















I was reading a book in which it is mentioned that:



Rotate coordinate axes by $45$ degrees so that a point $(x,y)$ becomes $(x+y,y-x)$ .



Here is image 1



Here is image 2



I can't understand how the new coordinates became $(x+y,y-x)$ .
If I apply the formula for rotation of axes I'll get $sqrt{2}$ $(x-y, x+y) $.







geometry rotations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









dmtri

1,4141521




1,4141521










asked 8 hours ago









Ayaz S Imran

235




235












  • I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago










  • Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
    – Martín Vacas Vignolo
    8 hours ago










  • @MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago






  • 3




    @MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago










  • youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago


















  • I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago










  • Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
    – Martín Vacas Vignolo
    8 hours ago










  • @MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago






  • 3




    @MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
    – Ayaz S Imran
    8 hours ago










  • youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    8 hours ago
















I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
– Mohammad Zuhair Khan
8 hours ago




I agree with you. The distance $BC$ before the rotation is $sqrt {13}$ while it is $sqrt {26}$ afterwards. I think they stretch it back afterwards .
– Mohammad Zuhair Khan
8 hours ago












Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
– Martín Vacas Vignolo
8 hours ago




Yes, your are right. But, please explain the context.
– Martín Vacas Vignolo
8 hours ago












@MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
– Ayaz S Imran
8 hours ago




@MohammadZuhairKhan I've uploaded the whole section. Can you look something now?
– Ayaz S Imran
8 hours ago




3




3




@MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
– Ayaz S Imran
8 hours ago




@MartínVacasVignolo the new coordinates after rotation of the cordinates at an angle f for a point (x,y){x = Xcos(f) - Ysin(f)}{y = Xcos(f) + Ysin(f)}
– Ayaz S Imran
8 hours ago












youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
– Mohammad Zuhair Khan
8 hours ago




youtube.com/watch?v=BPgq2AudoEo if you want more details.
– Mohammad Zuhair Khan
8 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















4














As noted, that transformation isn't an isometry; it's a $45^circ$ rotation composed with a dilation by $sqrt{2}$.



But then, looking at the pictures, we're not looking at Euclidean geometry - we're instead looking at the distances derived from the 1-norm $|(x,y)|_1=|x|+|y|$ and the $infty$-norm $|(x,y)|=max(|x|,|y|)$. From that perspective, we're just fine leaving that scale factor in so the transformation has rational coefficients. The formula for $T^{-1}$ will have factors of $frac12$, and that's just not a big deal.



Let $T(x,y)=(x+y,y-x)$. The linked pictures say that $|T(v)|_{infty}=|v|_1$. We also get $|T(v)|_1=2|v|_{infty}$. Taking two steps, $T^2(x,y)=(2y,-2x)$, which doubles both norms. What this is saying is that the geometry we get from the $1$-norm and the geometry we get from the $infty$-norm are isomorphic - because this transformation $T$ transforms one distance into the other. Using the irrational version that's an isometry in the Euclidean metric would only make things worse by introducing a factor of $sqrt{2}$ to the distances we're looking at. Pass.






share|cite|improve this answer





























    1














    You are rotating the coordinate axes, not the points. Let $(x,y)$ be a point in the plane. Then $(x,y)=x(1,0)+y(0,1)$. A rotation of the coordinates by $45^{circ}$ takes $(1,0)$ to $(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$ and $(0,1)$ to $(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$.



    To find the new coordinates $(x',y')$ we must solve $$x'(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})+y'(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})=(x,y)$$



    Grouping terms on the left of the equation and equating coordinates gives $$x'-y'=sqrt{2}x$$ $$x'+y'=sqrt{2}y$$



    The $sqrt{2}$ corresponds to the length of the diagonal of a unit square which is $2$ in taxicab geometry. Replacing $sqrt{2}$ with $2$ in out system of equations gives us $$x'-y'=2x$$ $$x'+y'=2y$$



    We can solve this system for $x'$ and $y'$ to obtain $$x'=x+y$$ $$y'=y-x$$.






    share|cite|improve this answer































      0














      I'd think that the author was more concerned to the underlayed square lattice grid, as being displayed in your linked pictures. That is, integer coordinates ought be transformed into integer coordinates only, and not into something irrational, involving a sqrt(2) factor.



      --- rk






      share|cite|improve this answer





























        0














        In this text, "rotate" is used in a loose sense, as it is actually combined with a scaling by $sqrt2$, to keep integer coordinates.





        To rotate is the verb that corresponds to rotation. There is no verb for "similarity transformation".






        share|cite|improve this answer





















          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057471%2frotation-of-axes-by-45-degrees%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes








          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          As noted, that transformation isn't an isometry; it's a $45^circ$ rotation composed with a dilation by $sqrt{2}$.



          But then, looking at the pictures, we're not looking at Euclidean geometry - we're instead looking at the distances derived from the 1-norm $|(x,y)|_1=|x|+|y|$ and the $infty$-norm $|(x,y)|=max(|x|,|y|)$. From that perspective, we're just fine leaving that scale factor in so the transformation has rational coefficients. The formula for $T^{-1}$ will have factors of $frac12$, and that's just not a big deal.



          Let $T(x,y)=(x+y,y-x)$. The linked pictures say that $|T(v)|_{infty}=|v|_1$. We also get $|T(v)|_1=2|v|_{infty}$. Taking two steps, $T^2(x,y)=(2y,-2x)$, which doubles both norms. What this is saying is that the geometry we get from the $1$-norm and the geometry we get from the $infty$-norm are isomorphic - because this transformation $T$ transforms one distance into the other. Using the irrational version that's an isometry in the Euclidean metric would only make things worse by introducing a factor of $sqrt{2}$ to the distances we're looking at. Pass.






          share|cite|improve this answer


























            4














            As noted, that transformation isn't an isometry; it's a $45^circ$ rotation composed with a dilation by $sqrt{2}$.



            But then, looking at the pictures, we're not looking at Euclidean geometry - we're instead looking at the distances derived from the 1-norm $|(x,y)|_1=|x|+|y|$ and the $infty$-norm $|(x,y)|=max(|x|,|y|)$. From that perspective, we're just fine leaving that scale factor in so the transformation has rational coefficients. The formula for $T^{-1}$ will have factors of $frac12$, and that's just not a big deal.



            Let $T(x,y)=(x+y,y-x)$. The linked pictures say that $|T(v)|_{infty}=|v|_1$. We also get $|T(v)|_1=2|v|_{infty}$. Taking two steps, $T^2(x,y)=(2y,-2x)$, which doubles both norms. What this is saying is that the geometry we get from the $1$-norm and the geometry we get from the $infty$-norm are isomorphic - because this transformation $T$ transforms one distance into the other. Using the irrational version that's an isometry in the Euclidean metric would only make things worse by introducing a factor of $sqrt{2}$ to the distances we're looking at. Pass.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              4












              4








              4






              As noted, that transformation isn't an isometry; it's a $45^circ$ rotation composed with a dilation by $sqrt{2}$.



              But then, looking at the pictures, we're not looking at Euclidean geometry - we're instead looking at the distances derived from the 1-norm $|(x,y)|_1=|x|+|y|$ and the $infty$-norm $|(x,y)|=max(|x|,|y|)$. From that perspective, we're just fine leaving that scale factor in so the transformation has rational coefficients. The formula for $T^{-1}$ will have factors of $frac12$, and that's just not a big deal.



              Let $T(x,y)=(x+y,y-x)$. The linked pictures say that $|T(v)|_{infty}=|v|_1$. We also get $|T(v)|_1=2|v|_{infty}$. Taking two steps, $T^2(x,y)=(2y,-2x)$, which doubles both norms. What this is saying is that the geometry we get from the $1$-norm and the geometry we get from the $infty$-norm are isomorphic - because this transformation $T$ transforms one distance into the other. Using the irrational version that's an isometry in the Euclidean metric would only make things worse by introducing a factor of $sqrt{2}$ to the distances we're looking at. Pass.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              As noted, that transformation isn't an isometry; it's a $45^circ$ rotation composed with a dilation by $sqrt{2}$.



              But then, looking at the pictures, we're not looking at Euclidean geometry - we're instead looking at the distances derived from the 1-norm $|(x,y)|_1=|x|+|y|$ and the $infty$-norm $|(x,y)|=max(|x|,|y|)$. From that perspective, we're just fine leaving that scale factor in so the transformation has rational coefficients. The formula for $T^{-1}$ will have factors of $frac12$, and that's just not a big deal.



              Let $T(x,y)=(x+y,y-x)$. The linked pictures say that $|T(v)|_{infty}=|v|_1$. We also get $|T(v)|_1=2|v|_{infty}$. Taking two steps, $T^2(x,y)=(2y,-2x)$, which doubles both norms. What this is saying is that the geometry we get from the $1$-norm and the geometry we get from the $infty$-norm are isomorphic - because this transformation $T$ transforms one distance into the other. Using the irrational version that's an isometry in the Euclidean metric would only make things worse by introducing a factor of $sqrt{2}$ to the distances we're looking at. Pass.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered 6 hours ago









              jmerry

              1,53817




              1,53817























                  1














                  You are rotating the coordinate axes, not the points. Let $(x,y)$ be a point in the plane. Then $(x,y)=x(1,0)+y(0,1)$. A rotation of the coordinates by $45^{circ}$ takes $(1,0)$ to $(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$ and $(0,1)$ to $(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$.



                  To find the new coordinates $(x',y')$ we must solve $$x'(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})+y'(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})=(x,y)$$



                  Grouping terms on the left of the equation and equating coordinates gives $$x'-y'=sqrt{2}x$$ $$x'+y'=sqrt{2}y$$



                  The $sqrt{2}$ corresponds to the length of the diagonal of a unit square which is $2$ in taxicab geometry. Replacing $sqrt{2}$ with $2$ in out system of equations gives us $$x'-y'=2x$$ $$x'+y'=2y$$



                  We can solve this system for $x'$ and $y'$ to obtain $$x'=x+y$$ $$y'=y-x$$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer




























                    1














                    You are rotating the coordinate axes, not the points. Let $(x,y)$ be a point in the plane. Then $(x,y)=x(1,0)+y(0,1)$. A rotation of the coordinates by $45^{circ}$ takes $(1,0)$ to $(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$ and $(0,1)$ to $(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$.



                    To find the new coordinates $(x',y')$ we must solve $$x'(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})+y'(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})=(x,y)$$



                    Grouping terms on the left of the equation and equating coordinates gives $$x'-y'=sqrt{2}x$$ $$x'+y'=sqrt{2}y$$



                    The $sqrt{2}$ corresponds to the length of the diagonal of a unit square which is $2$ in taxicab geometry. Replacing $sqrt{2}$ with $2$ in out system of equations gives us $$x'-y'=2x$$ $$x'+y'=2y$$



                    We can solve this system for $x'$ and $y'$ to obtain $$x'=x+y$$ $$y'=y-x$$.






                    share|cite|improve this answer


























                      1












                      1








                      1






                      You are rotating the coordinate axes, not the points. Let $(x,y)$ be a point in the plane. Then $(x,y)=x(1,0)+y(0,1)$. A rotation of the coordinates by $45^{circ}$ takes $(1,0)$ to $(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$ and $(0,1)$ to $(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$.



                      To find the new coordinates $(x',y')$ we must solve $$x'(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})+y'(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})=(x,y)$$



                      Grouping terms on the left of the equation and equating coordinates gives $$x'-y'=sqrt{2}x$$ $$x'+y'=sqrt{2}y$$



                      The $sqrt{2}$ corresponds to the length of the diagonal of a unit square which is $2$ in taxicab geometry. Replacing $sqrt{2}$ with $2$ in out system of equations gives us $$x'-y'=2x$$ $$x'+y'=2y$$



                      We can solve this system for $x'$ and $y'$ to obtain $$x'=x+y$$ $$y'=y-x$$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      You are rotating the coordinate axes, not the points. Let $(x,y)$ be a point in the plane. Then $(x,y)=x(1,0)+y(0,1)$. A rotation of the coordinates by $45^{circ}$ takes $(1,0)$ to $(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$ and $(0,1)$ to $(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})$.



                      To find the new coordinates $(x',y')$ we must solve $$x'(frac{1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})+y'(frac{-1}{sqrt{2}},frac{1}{sqrt{2}})=(x,y)$$



                      Grouping terms on the left of the equation and equating coordinates gives $$x'-y'=sqrt{2}x$$ $$x'+y'=sqrt{2}y$$



                      The $sqrt{2}$ corresponds to the length of the diagonal of a unit square which is $2$ in taxicab geometry. Replacing $sqrt{2}$ with $2$ in out system of equations gives us $$x'-y'=2x$$ $$x'+y'=2y$$



                      We can solve this system for $x'$ and $y'$ to obtain $$x'=x+y$$ $$y'=y-x$$.







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited 5 hours ago

























                      answered 5 hours ago









                      John Douma

                      5,30911319




                      5,30911319























                          0














                          I'd think that the author was more concerned to the underlayed square lattice grid, as being displayed in your linked pictures. That is, integer coordinates ought be transformed into integer coordinates only, and not into something irrational, involving a sqrt(2) factor.



                          --- rk






                          share|cite|improve this answer


























                            0














                            I'd think that the author was more concerned to the underlayed square lattice grid, as being displayed in your linked pictures. That is, integer coordinates ought be transformed into integer coordinates only, and not into something irrational, involving a sqrt(2) factor.



                            --- rk






                            share|cite|improve this answer
























                              0












                              0








                              0






                              I'd think that the author was more concerned to the underlayed square lattice grid, as being displayed in your linked pictures. That is, integer coordinates ought be transformed into integer coordinates only, and not into something irrational, involving a sqrt(2) factor.



                              --- rk






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              I'd think that the author was more concerned to the underlayed square lattice grid, as being displayed in your linked pictures. That is, integer coordinates ought be transformed into integer coordinates only, and not into something irrational, involving a sqrt(2) factor.



                              --- rk







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered 4 hours ago









                              Dr. Richard Klitzing

                              1,2966




                              1,2966























                                  0














                                  In this text, "rotate" is used in a loose sense, as it is actually combined with a scaling by $sqrt2$, to keep integer coordinates.





                                  To rotate is the verb that corresponds to rotation. There is no verb for "similarity transformation".






                                  share|cite|improve this answer


























                                    0














                                    In this text, "rotate" is used in a loose sense, as it is actually combined with a scaling by $sqrt2$, to keep integer coordinates.





                                    To rotate is the verb that corresponds to rotation. There is no verb for "similarity transformation".






                                    share|cite|improve this answer
























                                      0












                                      0








                                      0






                                      In this text, "rotate" is used in a loose sense, as it is actually combined with a scaling by $sqrt2$, to keep integer coordinates.





                                      To rotate is the verb that corresponds to rotation. There is no verb for "similarity transformation".






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      In this text, "rotate" is used in a loose sense, as it is actually combined with a scaling by $sqrt2$, to keep integer coordinates.





                                      To rotate is the verb that corresponds to rotation. There is no verb for "similarity transformation".







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered 3 hours ago









                                      Yves Daoust

                                      124k671221




                                      124k671221






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057471%2frotation-of-axes-by-45-degrees%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Morgemoulin

                                          Scott Moir

                                          Souastre