Deriving Lemniscate Locus Equation: Is It a Typo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ronaldor9
  • Start date Start date
ronaldor9
Messages
91
Reaction score
1
Hello from the book I am reading it defines the lemniscate as the locus for which the product of the distances r1 and r2 with the coordinates x= a and x= -1 and y= 0 has the constant value of a2.

I went about deriving the equation in polar coordinates from this locus, however I do not get the correct equation when the locus is defines as r1 x r2 = a2 but when r1 x r2 = a the correct equation is arrived at.

Is this simply a typo on behalf of the author?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello ronaldor9! :smile:

(try using the X2 and X2 tags just above the Reply box :wink:)
ronaldor9 said:
… however I do not get the correct equation when the locus is defines as r_1 x r_2 = a^2 but when r_1 x r_2 = a^2 the correct equation is arrived at.

erm :redface:what's the difference? :confused:
 
I went about deriving the equation in polar coordinates from this locus, however I do not get the correct equation when the locus is defines as r1 x r2 = a2 but when r1 x r2 = a the correct equation is arrived at.

FIXED thanks!
 
Hello! There is a simple line in the textbook. If ##S## is a manifold, an injectively immersed submanifold ##M## of ##S## is embedded if and only if ##M## is locally closed in ##S##. Recall the definition. M is locally closed if for each point ##x\in M## there open ##U\subset S## such that ##M\cap U## is closed in ##U##. Embedding to injective immesion is simple. The opposite direction is hard. Suppose I have ##N## as source manifold and ##f:N\rightarrow S## is the injective...
Back
Top