mferraro89

Did this article at some point give up and jump straight into something too difficult?

ha, thank you for your honest feedback. My intended audience is not PhDs or math majors, it is high school physics teachers, practicing engineers, programmers, precocious high school students, etc. Many of these people benefit from some definitions.

I include 3 sentences defining a scalar so that I could introduce the concept of grade.

I include a few sentences defining a vector because just read the comments here and you'll see there are many definitions of vector and I want to specifically call out the one I care about in this post. I am also using a nonstandard, color-based notation throughout the article so it is helpful to take a concept that people already know just to demonstrate my notation. This also lets me introduce the 3D interactive illustrations.

Did you read the rest of the article or were these two definitions so objectionable that you quit?

thank you! It took a whole month to get the 3D illustrations working well.

why? too clickbaity?

Hi. I wrote whole section on the history of GA and what happened and why it isn't already the norm, but I chose to remove it because the article is already far too long, and I don't think that my intended audience (engineers, compsci people, university undergrads) would care about the history. Apologies that wasn't what you would have preferred.

hey, if you have time to detail those mistakes I'd be happy to fix them in the text. Can you email me at [email protected]

author here. I was mistaken about the 5 degrees of freedom bit. Bivectors have three. I'll fix the text tonight. I'm sorry you wasted ten minutes on my nonsense.

Yes, a bivector has 3 degrees of freedom. I was mistaken when I wrote 5. I'll fix the text tonight.

Author here: I was wrong about the 5 degrees of freedom thing. A bivector has 3 degrees of freedom. I'll correct the text tonight.

yep that paper is extremely impressive! I would love to implement that approach as well, but it is much more computationally expensive. In the Q&A after a talk from that paper's author, he mentions that it takes about 6 hours for the algorithm to run. The approach I took, modeled off of Yue et al, takes about 30 seconds. The trade-off is that the Schwartzburg paper is capable of much more general purpose remapping. It does not require continuity, which is why that paper results in ray folding which you can see as creasing in the lens.

Author here. At my day job I spend lots of hours debugging messy React code! The key is to have side projects too :)

yep I think you're exactly right, as evidenced by the fringes.