Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Elliptical trajectories of a point on the elliptical 2-sphere

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read On an ellipsoid, magnetic trajectories are governed by a single ordinary differential equation for geodesic curvature, with all solutions given explicitly; helices are rolling great ellipses.

desk verdict A curve theory paper with concrete explicit formulas, but the central magnetic-trajectory theorem rests on an invalid Killing-field premise and the setup is isometric to the round sphere. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02751 v2 pith:RBUHRR44 submitted 2019-08-07 math.GM

Zehra Özdemir , Fatma Ateş This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GM MSC 53A0453C20
keywords elliptical2-spheremagnetictrajectoryKillingvectorfieldDarbouxframegeodesiccurvaturerotationhelixsatellitecurves
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper studies the paths of a point moving on the elliptical 2-sphere $\mathbb{S}_E^2 = \{a_1x^2+a_2y^2+a_3z^2=1\}$ under the influence of a magnetic field generated by a Killing vector field. It claims that these magnetic trajectories are exactly the curves whose Darboux geodesic curvature $k_g$ satisfies the differential equation $k_g'' + \delta k_g k_g' = 0$ for a constant $\delta$, and it gives explicit parametric formulas for all solutions. It further claims that helices on this surface—curves whose tangent keeps a constant angle with a Killing field—have curvature $k_g = \cot\theta$ with $\theta$ obeying a second-order equation, and that these helices are exactly the traces of a point on a great ellipse rolling without slipping on a fixed ellipse. If correct, this gives a uniform description of charged-particle trajectories and rolling-curve geometry on ellipsoids, with ready-to-use parametrizations.

What carries the argument

The engine of the paper is the elliptical Darboux frame $\{t, \gamma, y\}$ along a unit-speed curve $\gamma$ on $\mathbb{S}_E^2$, with $t = \gamma'$, $y = \gamma \times_E \gamma'$, and frame equations $t' = -\gamma + k_g y$, $y' = -k_g t$. This frame diagonalizes the Lorentz force: with respect to $\{t, \gamma, y\}$ the force matrix has entries built from $k_g$ and a quasislope function $\delta$. A variational Lemma computes how the speed and geodesic curvature change under a vector field $V$, and Proposition 3.2 asserts that these variations vanish when $V$ is a Killing field. Substituting the along-curve form $V = \delta t - k_g \gamma - y$ into the variation formulas yields the ODE $k_g'' + \delta k_g k_g' = 0$. The explicit trajectory formulas then follow by solving the third-order frame equation, and the rolling-ellipse description is produced by composing the elliptical rotations around two axes given by the rotation matrix theorem.

What would settle it

Check whether the explicit curve in Example 4.3, with $k_g(s)=s$, is a magnetic trajectory of a global Killing field by testing whether $V = -s\gamma(s) - y(s)$ extends to a vector field whose flow preserves $a_1x^2+a_2y^2+a_3z^2=1$; if it does not, that example contradicts the claim that the ODE characterizes magnetic trajectories, and the 'only if' direction of Theorem 4.3 collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that on the elliptical 2-sphere $\mathbb{S}_E^2$, the magnetic trajectory equation $\nabla_T T = V \times_E T$ for a Killing field $V$ is equivalently converted, via the Darboux frame $\{t, \gamma, y\}$, into the scalar condition $k_g'' + \delta k_g k_g' = 0$ with constant $\delta$; conversely every curve satisfying this ODE is presented as a magnetic trajectory with $V = \delta t - k_g\gamma - y$. The constant-curvature solutions give circles with explicit trigonometric parametrizations, and the nonconstant solutions are written in closed form with hyperbolic tangents and hypergeometric functions. On the kinematics side, the paper claims that helices, characterized by $k_g = \cot\theta$ and $\theta''\sin^2\theta - \omega\theta'\cos\theta = 0$, are exactly the paths of a point fixed on a great ellipse when the ellipse rolls without slipping on a fixed ellipse, and therefore are special cases of elliptical satellite curves and cycloids.

Load-bearing premise

The classification assumes that the vector field defined only along the curve by $V = \delta t - k_g \gamma - y$ is actually the restriction of a genuine symmetry (Killing) field of the whole ellipsoid; the paper does not prove such an extension exists, and the field is not even tangent to the surface in general.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every magnetic trajectory on the ellipsoid is determined by a single scalar function $k_g$ governed by a first-order solvable ODE, so the whole family is explicitly parametrized.
  • The constant-curvature solutions are periodic curves on the ellipsoid; choosing different constant values $k_g = c$ produces one-parameter families of closed trajectories.
  • Helices on the ellipsoid are exactly rolling great ellipses, so the same curves can be generated kinematically without integrating the Lorentz force equation.
  • Because helices satisfy the magnetic ODE when $\delta = 2k$ (Corollary 6.1), the magnetic and rolling descriptions coincide on that subfamily, giving a concrete bridge between the variational and kinematic viewpoints.
  • The elliptical rotation construction also supplies explicit parametrizations of satellite curves and cycloids on the ellipsoid, so the helix result embeds those families into one framework.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same Darboux-frame variation machinery should transfer to spaces of constant sectional curvature with the curvature constant $C$ changed in sign, giving analogous magnetic-trajectory ODEs on spheres and hyperbolic spaces.
  • The rolling-ellipse derivation suggests a purely kinematic route to Theorem 5.1: impose the no-slip relation between the rolling angle and arclength and derive $k_g = \cot(ks)$ directly, bypassing the variational apparatus.
  • The explicit formulas of Theorem 4.4 are concrete enough for numerical comparison; integrating the Lorentz force equation with the stated initial data and overlaying the plotted curves would test whether the ODE and frame equations produce identical trajectories.
  • The closed-form hypergeometric solutions could be examined for periodicity conditions on the ellipsoid parameters $a_1,a_2,a_3$; if closed trajectories only occur for rational relations among these parameters, that would give a classification of periodic magnetic trajectories.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies curves on the 'elliptical 2-sphere' S_E^2, defined by a1 x^2 + a2 y^2 + a3 z^2 = 1 and equipped with the elliptical inner product B. It introduces a Darboux frame along curves, derives variation formulas, and then uses these to characterize magnetic trajectories of Killing vector fields via the Lorentz force equation V times_E T = nabla_T T. The main claim (Theorem 4.3) is that a curve is such a magnetic trajectory iff its geodesic curvature satisfies kg'' + delta kg kg' = 0; Theorem 4.4 gives explicit parametrizations. The second half of the paper interprets helices on S_E^2 as trajectories of points on a great ellipse rolling without slipping on a fixed ellipse and connects them to cycloids and satellite curves. Various examples are plotted with Mathematica.

Significance. If the central characterization were correct, the paper would contribute a concrete family of magnetic curves on ellipsoids and a rolling-geometry interpretation of helices, with potential applications in geometric mechanics. The paper does provide several explicit parametrized examples and figures, which are useful for visual intuition. However, the main results are not supported because the vector field V used in the magnetic characterization is not a vector field on the surface, and the connection employed in the Lorentz force equation is not the Levi-Civita connection as stated. These issues invalidate the principal theorems and the derived classification, so the paper's significance is currently not realized.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Proposition 4.2 and Theorem 4.3] The vector field V(s) = delta T - kg gamma - y defined in Eq. (26) is not a vector field on S_E^2 unless kg = 0. Since S_E^2 is defined by B(x,x)=1, the position vector gamma is the unit normal, and the tangent space at gamma(s) is the B-orthogonal complement of gamma(s). Directly, B(V,gamma)=delta B(T,gamma)-kg B(gamma,gamma)-B(y,gamma)=-kg, which is nonzero for any curve with nonzero geodesic curvature. For Example 4.1, kg=sqrt(2), so B(V,gamma) is nonzero. Therefore V is not tangent to the surface and cannot be a Killing vector field of S_E^2. Consequently, Proposition 3.2 cannot be invoked to conclude V(v)=0 and V(kg)=0; the derivation of Eq. (32) lacks its essential premise. This is a load-bearing flaw in Theorem 4.3.
  2. [§4, Eq. (20) and subsequent computation] The Lorentz force equation is stated with nabla as the Levi-Civita connection of S_E^2, but the computations use the ambient connection in R^3. In the proof of Proposition 4.1, nabla_T T is computed as -gamma + kg y, which includes the normal component -gamma. For the Levi-Civita connection of the surface, the covariant derivative along a curve should be tangential, with the normal component removed by the second fundamental form. The paper's equations are consistent only if nabla is interpreted as the ambient derivative, contradicting the stated definition. This affects the meaning of the magnetic trajectory equation and calls into question the connection between the paper's curves and genuine magnetic trajectories on the ellipsoid.
  3. [§6, Helical trajectories via elliptical rotation] The parametrization (41) is claimed to be a helix with Killing axis V(s) = (0,0,-1). However, a constant vector field is not tangent to S_E^2 and is not a Killing field of the surface metric. The paper does not prove that the stated V is a Killing vector field along the curve, nor that the curve satisfies the definition of a helix given in Theorem 5.1 (tangent making a constant angle with a constant Killing field). The derivation of the curvature kg = cot(k s) in Eq. (42) is also not shown. This leaves the rolling-ellipse interpretation, a central advertised contribution, unsupported.
  4. [§4, Theorem 4.4] The proof of Theorem 4.4 states that the elliptical Darboux frame equation leads to a third order differential equation, but no derivation is given. Since the ODE and the definition of magnetic trajectory are invalidated by the non-tangency of V, the explicit parametrizations in Eqs. (33) and (34), even if they solve the stated ODE, are not established as magnetic trajectories on S_E^2. The classification of all magnetic curves is therefore not proven.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] The terminology 'elliptical 2-sphere' is used inconsistently with the title's 'elliptical 2-sphere' and the abstract's 'elliptical 2-sphere' notation; please standardize.
  2. [Lemma 3.1 and Eq. (7)] In the derivation of V(v), the term is computed as v B(nabla_t V, t), but the final expression is -v w with w = -B(nabla_t V, t); this is consistent only up to a sign convention that is not explained.
  3. [Proposition 4.2, proof] The text refers to eq.(42) but the intended reference is Eq. (26); this cross-reference error should be corrected.
  4. [Theorem 5.1, proof] After Eq. (38), the proof states 'Using the equation V(v)=0 in Lemma 3.1. we present delta is a constant', but delta is not defined in this section and the argument is unclear; the proof should be rewritten.
  5. [§2, Preliminaries] The sectional curvature formula (2) and the curvature tensor (4) are stated for a space form, but the paper does not verify that S_E^2 with the B-induced metric has constant sectional curvature; a brief justification is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core derivation is self-contained; the serious weakness is an unproved global-Killing extension, which is a correctness gap rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's main classification chain is not circular. The elliptical inner product and cross product are defined explicitly in Section 2, the Darboux frame equations and their variational formulas are derived in Sections 2 and 3, and Theorem 4.3 obtains the ODE kg'' + δ kg kg' = 0 by combining the Lorentz-force equation with the Killing-field hypothesis through Proposition 3.2. Theorem 4.4 then solves the resulting frame equations rather than importing the conclusion. The citations to [Ozd1] and [16] supply the elliptical rotation matrix and basic product formulas; those are tools, not the source of the magnetic-curve classification. The most serious issue is that Proposition 4.2 constructs V = δT − kgγ − y only along the curve and the proof never establishes that this field extends to a global Killing vector field of S_E^2; indeed B(V,γ) = −kg shows the constructed V is not even tangent to the ellipsoid when kg ≠ 0. This undermines the application of Proposition 3.2 and the necessity direction of Theorem 4.3, but it is an omitted justification and a correctness defect, not a case of the conclusion being assumed or of a fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction. The helical and cycloid sections reuse known spherical-curve constructions in elliptical coordinates; while they are coordinate rewritings, the paper does not disguise them as independent empirical discoveries. Accordingly, no specific circular step can be quoted and exhibited, and the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the arbitrary positive parameters a1, a2, a3 and on integration constants in the curve representations, but no quantity is fitted to data. The critical assumptions are the constant-curvature property, which is standard, and the unproved extension of V to a global Killing field, which is ad hoc and affects the validity of the magnetic curve classification.

free parameters (5)
  • a1, a2, a3 (ellipsoid squared semi-axis parameters) = arbitrary positive; 4, 9, 16 in figures
    Define the elliptical inner product and the surface S_E^2; every formula and example depends on them, but they are inputs, not fitted to data.
  • δ (quasislope) = constant; 0 in Example 4.3, 2k in Corollary 6.1
    Integration constant in the magnetic-curvature ODE; chosen by hand in examples, not fitted to measurements.
  • c1, c2 (magnetic curvature integration constants) = arbitrary real constants
    Appear in the tanh and hypergeometric solutions of Theorem 4.4.
  • η1, η2, η3 and μ1, μ2, μ3 (constant coefficient vectors) = chosen in examples, e.g. Example 4.1
    Constant vectors parameterizing the magnetic curve representations.
  • k, α, ω, a, b (helix, satellite, and cycloid parameters) = various values in Section 6 figures
    Parameters governing the rolling ellipse constructions; hand-chosen for examples.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math S_E^2 has constant sectional curvature C under the elliptical inner product, so R(X,Y)Z = C{B(Z,X)Y - B(Z,Y)X}.
    True because diagonal rescaling maps the ellipsoid to the round sphere; the paper invokes it in eq. (4) without proof.
  • domain assumption The elliptical rotation matrix formula from [16] is correct and generates isometries of S_E^2.
    Used in Section 6 to construct helices, satellite curves, and cycloids; cited from prior work, not re-proven.
  • ad hoc to paper A vector field defined along γ by eq. (26) extends to a global Killing vector field on S_E^2.
    This is the load-bearing assumption; no proof of global extension is given, and B(V,γ) = -kg implies V is not tangent to the surface, so it is not a standard tangent Killing field.
  • ad hoc to paper The connection ∇ in the Lorentz force equation (20) is the Levi-Civita connection of the ellipsoid.
    The equations use T' = -γ + kg y, which includes the normal component -γ, i.e. the ambient connection, contradicting the stated surface connection.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Elliptical trajectories of a point on the elliptical 2-sphere." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RBUHRR44

@misc{pith2026190802751,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Elliptical trajectories of a point on the elliptical 2-sphere},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RBUHRR44}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02751}
}
abstract

The focus of this work is to analyze the trajectories of a point on the ellipsoid $\mathbb{S}_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}^{2}$ while it is under the influence of a Killing vector field $K$. For this purpose, we introduce the generalized Darboux frame and the variational vector fields of $\mathbb{S}_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}^{2}$. Then, we determine the Killing equations in terms of the Darboux frame invariants along an ellipsoidal curve. The Killing equations make it possible for us to interpret the magnetic trajectory of a point on the ellipsoid $\mathbb{S}_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}^{2}$. Then, we determine two special trajectories using the variational method. The first one is magnetic curves that are the trajectories produced by the Killing magnetic field $K$ are satisfied the following Lorentz force equation $F_{L} (t)=K\times _{E}t=\nabla _{T}t$, where $\times _{E}$ is elliptical cross product and $\nabla $ is the Levi-Civita connection of the ellipsoid $\mathbb{S}_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}^{2}$. The second one is generalized magnetic helices that are trajectories described by the trajectory of a point on a great ellipse of the ellipsoid rolling without slipping on a fixed ellipse of the ellipsoid using the elliptical motion on the $\mathbb{S}_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}^{2}$. Furthermore, we give various examples and visualized them with the program Mathematica.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02751 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Charged particle motions along the curve 𝛾 on the 𝑆𝐸 2 . Example 4.2. If we choose 𝜂1 = (0, 1 √2𝑎2 , 0) 𝜂2 = (0,0, 1 √2𝑎3 ) , 𝜂3 = ( 1 √2𝑎1 , 0,0), we obtain the following magnetic curve on the 𝑆𝐸 2 parameterized by 𝛾(𝑠) = ( 𝑐𝑜𝑠 3 𝑠 √2𝑎1 , 1 √2𝑎2 , 𝑠𝑖𝑛 3 𝑠 √2𝑎3 ). with the elliptical curvature 𝑘𝑔𝐸 = √2. The image of the magnetic curve is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Charged particle motions along the curve 𝛾 on the 𝑆𝐸 2 . Example 4.3. Let 𝛾 be a curve on the elliptical 2-sphere and has the following parametric representation 𝛾(𝑠) = ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Charged particle motions along along the curve [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The motion of a rigid body around an axis in three dimensions is a linear transformation that can be expressed with an orthonormal matrix

    Introduction A rotation is defined as a map such that the distances between two points are preserved under this transformation. The motion of a rigid body around an axis in three dimensions is a linear transformation that can be expressed with an orthonormal matrix. This matrix called a rotation matrix. The rotation matrices are used extensively for compu...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The real vector space 𝑅3 equipped with the elliptical inner product 𝐵 : 𝑅3 × 𝑅3 → 𝑅; 𝐵(𝑢, 𝑣) = 𝑎1𝑥1𝑦1 + 𝑎2𝑥2𝑦2 + 𝑎3𝑥3𝑦3

    Preliminaries In this section, we present brief information of the structures on the elliptical 2-sphere 𝑆𝐸 2 to describe the basic background. The real vector space 𝑅3 equipped with the elliptical inner product 𝐵 : 𝑅3 × 𝑅3 → 𝑅; 𝐵(𝑢, 𝑣) = 𝑎1𝑥1𝑦1 + 𝑎2𝑥2𝑦2 + 𝑎3𝑥3𝑦3. is represented by 𝑅𝑎1,𝑎2,𝑎3 3 . Where 𝑢 = (𝑢1, 𝑢2, 𝑢3), 𝑣 = (𝑣1, 𝑣2, 𝑣3) ∈ 𝑅3 and 𝑎1, 𝑎2, 𝑎3...

    work page

  3. [3]

    𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 𝛥𝑢3 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎1 − 𝑎2𝑢1𝑢2(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) 𝛥𝑢2 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎1 − 𝑎3𝑢1𝑢3(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) 𝛥𝑢3 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎2 − 𝑎1𝑢1𝑢2(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) 𝑎2𝑢2 2 + (1 − 𝑎2𝑢2

    work page

  4. [4]

    𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 𝛥𝑢1 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎2 − 𝑎3𝑢2𝑢3(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) − 𝛥𝑢2 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎3 − 𝑎1𝑢1𝑢3(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) 𝛥𝑢1 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝜃 𝑎3 − 𝑎2𝑢2𝑢3(𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 − 1) 𝑎3𝑢3 2 + (1 − 𝑎3𝑢3

    work page

  5. [5]

    𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝜃 ) where 𝛥 = √𝑎1𝑎2𝑎3 and 𝑢 = (𝑢1, 𝑢2, 𝑢3), is the rotation axis and 𝜃 is the elliptical rotation angle [16]

    work page

  6. [6]

    First, we study the features of variational vector field along a curve and calculate the variational formulas for its Darboux curvatures

    Variations of Darboux Frame for elliptical 2-sphere In this section, we examine the variational formulations of the curves on the elliptical 2-sphere 𝑆𝐸 2 to discribe the motion of a point on the 𝑆𝐸 2 . First, we study the features of variational vector field along a curve and calculate the variational formulas for its Darboux curvatures. After that, we g...

    work page

  7. [7]

    A magnetic field 𝐹 on the 𝑆𝐸 2 is a closed 2-form

    Magnetic trajectories of the point on the elliptical 2-sphere When a charged particle enters in a magnetic field, it traces a new trajectory called as magnetic curve with the influences of the magnetic field. A magnetic field 𝐹 on the 𝑆𝐸 2 is a closed 2-form. The Lorentz force of the magnetic field 𝐹 related to the elliptical inner product on 𝑆𝐸 2 is defi...

    work page

  8. [8]

    is satisfy (18) 𝐵(𝑋 ×𝐸 𝑌, 𝑍) = 𝑑𝑣𝑔(𝑋, 𝑌, 𝑍) where 𝑑𝑣𝑔 denotes a volume on the 𝑆𝐸 2 . Since, divergence free vector fields and magnetic fields are in one-to-one correspondence, the Lorentz force 𝜑 associated with the magnetic field 𝑉 can be given by the following formula (19) 𝜑(𝑋) = 𝑉 ×𝐸 𝑋. From these formulates the trajectories produced by the magnetic fi...

    work page

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Theorem 5.1

    Helical trajectories of the point on the elliptical 2-sphere In the following theorem, we introduce the helices on the elliptical 2 -sphere defined as a curve whose tangent vector makes a constant angle with a constant Killing vector field on the elliptical 2-sphere 𝑆𝐸 2 . The...

  2. [10]

    Helical trajectories of the point on the elliptical 2-sphere via elliptical rotation In this section, we proved that helices on the 𝑆𝐸 2 can be described by the motion of a point on a great ellipse of the 𝑆𝐸 2 rolling without slipping on a fixed ellipse of the 𝑆𝐸 2 . Furthermo...

  3. [11]

    Magnetic vortex filament flows

    Barros M, Cabrerizo JL, Fernández M, Romero A. Magnetic vortex filament flows. J Math Phys 2007; 48: 1-27

    2007

  4. [12]

    General helices in the 3-dimensional Lorentzian space forms

    Barros M, Ferrandez A, Lucas P, Merono MA. General helices in the 3-dimensional Lorentzian space forms. Rocky Mt J Math 2001; 31: 373-388

    2001

  5. [13]

    The Gauss--Landau--Hall problem on Riemanniansurfaces

    Barros, M.; Romero, A.; Cabrerizo, J.L.; Fernández, M. The Gauss--Landau--Hall problem on Riemanniansurfaces. J. Math. Phys. 2005,46

    2005

  6. [14]

    A new approach for magnetic curves in 3D Riemannian manifolds.J

    Bozkurt, Z.; Gök, I.; Yayl Y.; Ekmekci, F.N. A new approach for magnetic curves in 3D Riemannian manifolds.J. Math. Phys. 2014,55, 053501

    2014

  7. [15]

    Blaschke, W., Differential Geometria, p:41, (1908)

    1908

  8. [16]

    Magnetic fields in 2D and 3D sphere

    Cabrerizo, J.L. Magnetic fields in 2D and 3D sphere. J. Nonlinear Math. Phys. 2013,20, 440--450

    2013

  9. [17]

    Cabderou, M., Satellites Orbites et Missions, Springer-Verlag France 2003

    2003

  10. [18]

    Coxeter, H.S.M.: A geometrical background for de Sitter's world. Am. Math.Mon. (Math. Assoc. Am.) 50(4), 217--228 (JSTOR 2303924) (1943)

    1943

  11. [19]

    de Sitter, W.: On the relativity of inertia: remarks concerning Einstein's latesthypothesis. Proc. Kon. Ned. Acad. Wet. 19, 1217--1225 (1917)

    1917

  12. [20]

    Magnetic Curves corresponding to Killing magnetic fields in E3

    Druta-Romaniuc, S.L.; Munteanu, M.I. Magnetic Curves corresponding to Killing magnetic fields in E3. J. Math. Phys. 2011,52, 113506

    2011

  13. [21]

    Killing magnetic curves in a Minkowski 3-space

    Druta-Romaniuc, S.L.; Munteanu, M.I. Killing magnetic curves in a Minkowski 3-space. Nonlinear Anal. RealWorld Appl. 2013,14, 383--396

    2013

  14. [22]

    Gurbuz, p-Elastica in the 3-Dimensional Lorentzian Space Forms, Turk J Math 30 (2006) , 33 -- 41

    N. Gurbuz, p-Elastica in the 3-Dimensional Lorentzian Space Forms, Turk J Math 30 (2006) , 33 -- 41

    2006

  15. [23]

    Lopez, Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces in Lorentz-Minkowski Space, International Electronic Journal of Geometry,7(1), 44 - 107, 2014

    R. Lopez, Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces in Lorentz-Minkowski Space, International Electronic Journal of Geometry,7(1), 44 - 107, 2014

    2014

  16. [24]

    O'Neill, Semi-Riemannian geometry with applications to relativity, Academic press, New York, 1983

    B. O'Neill, Semi-Riemannian geometry with applications to relativity, Academic press, New York, 1983

    1983

  17. [25]

    Notes on Magnetic Curves in 3D semi-Riemannian Manifolds

    Ozdemir Z, Gok I, Yayl Y, Ekmekci FN. Notes on Magnetic Curves in 3D semi-Riemannian Manifolds. Turk J Math. 2015; 39: 412-426

    2015

  18. [26]

    Özdemir M., An Alternative Approach to Elliptical Motion, Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras 26 (2016), 279--304

    2016

  19. [27]

    Magnetic flows on a Riemann surface

    Sunada, T. Magnetic flows on a Riemann surface. In Proceedings of the KAIST Mathematics Workshop:Analysis and Geometry, Taejeon, Korea, 3--6 August 1993; KAIST: Daejeon, Korea, 1993

    1993

  20. [28]

    World Scientific Publ

    Susskind, L., Lindesay, J.: An Introduction to Black Holes, Information and theString Theory Revolution: The Holographic Universe. World Scientific Publ. (ISBN 981-256-083-1) (2005)

    2005

  21. [29]

    H., Kocayigit H., The Frenet and Darboux Instantaneous Rotain Vectors of Curves on Time-like Surfaces, Mathematical & Computational Applications, Vol

    Ugurlu, H. H., Kocayigit H., The Frenet and Darboux Instantaneous Rotain Vectors of Curves on Time-like Surfaces, Mathematical & Computational Applications, Vol. 1, No. 2. pp. 133-141 (1996)

    1996

  22. [30]

    https://www.mathcurve.com/courbes3d.gb/helicespheric/helicespheric.shtml. Zehra Özdemir, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science and Arts, University of Amasya, Amasya, TURKEY zehra.ozdemir@amasya.edu.tr Fatma Ateş, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science and Arts,...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.