Ellipsoids and Surfaces of Revolution

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter IniquiTrance
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Revolution Surfaces
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical properties of ellipsoids and their classification as surfaces of revolution. It is established that an ellipsoid defined by the equation \(\frac{x^{2}}{a^{2}}+ \frac{y^{2}}{b^{2}} + \frac{z^{2}}{c^{2}}=1\) with distinct values for a, b, and c cannot be classified as a surface of revolution. The reasoning provided indicates that surfaces of revolution require circular cross-sections perpendicular to an axis, which is not the case for ellipsoids with unequal semi-axes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ellipsoidal equations and their geometric implications
  • Knowledge of surfaces of revolution and their properties
  • Familiarity with cross-sectional analysis in three-dimensional geometry
  • Basic principles of calculus related to curves and rotation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of surfaces of revolution in detail
  • Explore the geometric implications of varying semi-axis lengths in ellipsoids
  • Learn about the relationship between curves and their three-dimensional representations
  • Investigate the mathematical proofs regarding the classification of surfaces based on cross-sections
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, geometry enthusiasts, and students studying advanced calculus or three-dimensional geometry will benefit from this discussion.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
My textbook notes that if:

[tex]\frac{x^{2}}{a^{2}}+ \frac{y^{2}}{b^{2}} + \frac{z^{2}}{c^{2}}=1[/tex]

and [tex]a \neq b \neq c[/tex]

Then the ellipsoid is not a surface of revolution. It seems to me though that one can always find a curve in the plane, which when rotated around a line will produce the ellipsoid.

Why is this not true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
IniquiTrance said:
My textbook notes that if:

[tex]\frac{x^{2}}{a^{2}}+ \frac{y^{2}}{b^{2}} + \frac{z^{2}}{c^{2}}=1[/tex]

and [tex]a \neq b \neq c[/tex]

Then the ellipsoid is not a surface of revolution. It seems to me though that one can always find a curve in the plane, which when rotated around a line will produce the ellipsoid.

Why is this not true?

Why is it not true that a rectangular block of wood is a surface of revolution? It just isn't.

A surface of revolution would require cross sections perpendicular to some axis that are circles. It is "apparent" that such cross sections of an ellipsoid don't exist unless two of a, b, and c are equal.
 
Ah, thanks for the explanation. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K