F=R/2 Derivation for Parabolic Approximation near Vertex

  • Thread starter Thread starter azaharak
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
AI Thread Summary
For small angles near the vertex of a parabola, it can be approximated by a circle, with the focus of the parabola being a critical point in optics. The discussion seeks a derivation showing that, in this limit, the focus is equivalent to R/2, where R is the radius of the approximating circle. Starting with the parabola defined by y = x^2/(4f), the derivatives at the vertex are analyzed to ensure both shapes have the same curvature. The requirement for matching second derivatives leads to the conclusion that the radius of the osculating circle must be r = 2f. This establishes a relationship between the focal length of the parabola and the radius of the approximating circle.
azaharak
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
Hi


For small angles or points near the vertex of a parabola we can approximate a parabolic surface with a circle. The focus of the parabola is a unique point specifically for optics (Parallel light will converge at the focus), and vice versa.

Has anyone come across an derivation that shows in the limit of small angles or points near its vertex, the focus of a parabola is equivalent to R/2 where R is the radius of a circle used to approximate the parabola near its vertex.

I've seen the derivation where we obtain
1/s+1/s'=2/R,

but they we always conclude that 2/R must be 1/F.

I was wondering if there is a derivation starting with the focal point of a parabola and then approximates to a circle.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Let the parabola be given by y= x^2/(4f), so that the focal length is f, and let the approximating circle be given by x^2+ (y- r)^2= r^2 so that the circle and parabola both pass through (0, 0).

The first derivative for the parabola is y'= 2x/(4f) which is 0 at x= 0. For the circle, the first derivative is given by 2x+ 2(y- r)y'= 0 or -2ry'= 0 at (0, 0) so the derivative there is 0.

The second derivative for the parabola is y'= 1/(2f) for all x. For the circle, the second derivative is given by 2+ 2y'+ 2(y- r)y''= 0 or 2- 2ry''= 0 when y= y'= 0 so y''= 1/r at (0, 0).

In order that the second derivatives at (0, 0) be the same, so that they have the same curvature there (this is called the "osculating" circle- look up "osculating" in a dictionary!), we must have 1/r= 1/(2f) so that r= 2f.

Since all succeeding derivatives of any quadratic function are 0, that the value, first derivative, and second derivative of two quadratic functions be the same at a point is the most stringent requirement we can place on them.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top