Talk:Quaternions and spatial rotation: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
no pictures
Line 109:
 
:Agree. The article is not too technical; its too verbose. The mathematics behind this is actually quite easy, but you would never guess that from this article. The sheer heft of this article is daunting. This whole thing should be moved to wikibooks, and re-written from scratch. [[User:Linas|linas]] 14:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 
:Yes. FAR too technical. The person talking about rotating vectors makes much more sense to me than talking about reflections. The person saying reflections are the basis of the definition of rotation may be right for 4 or higher dimensions, but I really don't think this needs to be mentioned in the article at all, it only confuses me.
 
== Copied? ==