MHB Finding the Equation of a Line

  • Thread starter Thread starter Casio1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line
Casio1
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
OK I feel that I am stumped with this now. I have a circle problem. Given some coordinates I have calculated the gradient at -2/3. Then I am looking to find the midpoints, of the line, which are [4/2, -2/2]. I have then calculated the perpendicular of the line AB, which had a gradient - 2/3. The perdendicular gradient is 2/3.

I am then trying to find the equation of the line. This is what I have completed.

Bisector of line AB

bAB : y - [-2/2] = 2/3(x - 4/2) Implies y = 2/3x - 4/2 - 2/2 = y = 2/3x - 6/2

If this is the correct equation then I am at a loss because I am lead to believe that the parametric equation;

y = (3x - 8) / (2)

should give the same answer?

The parametric equation gives; y = (3(4/2) - 8) / (2) = - 2/2

I am quite OK with this because the midpoint is the same y value, so I think I got that right, but;

y = 2/3x - 6/2

Should give the same answer but to me does not?

y = 2/3(4/2) - 6/2 = - 1 2/3 which is - 1.67 (2dp)

The solutions are close but not exact, so I must be making a mistake somewhere I think?

Kind regards

Casio:confused:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Could you please state the original problem verbatim?
 
OK, its going to be a long day.

I have sone points which represent a circle. A(5, -3), B(-1,1) and C(0,2)

I am asked to find the slope AB, this is - 2/3

I am asked to find the coordinates of the midpoint of the line segment AB, these are [4/2, - 2/2]

using my answers above I am asked to find the equation of the perpendicular bisector AB.I got; y = 2/3(x - 6/2)

Then I was asked to eliminate t from a parametric equation to show the same line found in above from finding the equation.

parametric equation; y = (3x - 8) / (2)

I am not sure which values of x I am suppose to enter to find the value of y in each case, but the closest I can get is using the parametric equation is -2/2 and using the other equation the closest I get is - 1.67.

They are not the same and at this point am a bit lost with it?

Kind regards

Casio
 
Casio said:
Then I was asked to eliminate t from a parametric equation to show the same line found in above from finding the equation.

parametric equation; y = (3x - 8) / (2)

Hi Casio, :)

I don't understand the above quoted statement. What you have given is the slope intercept form of a line not the parametric form.

Maybe you would find the following video at Khan Academy useful in understanding parametric equations.

Linear Algebra: Parametric Representations of Lines | Linear Algebra | Khan Academy

Kind Regards,
Sudharaka.
 
OK I feel that I am stumped with this now. I have a circle problem. Given some coordinates I have calculated the gradient at -2/3. Then I am looking to find the midpoints, of the line, which are [4/2, -2/2]. I have then calculated the perpendicular of the line AB, which had a gradient - 2/3. The perdendicular gradient is 2/3.
No, it isn't. The gradient of the perpendicular line is 3/2. If two perpendicular lines have slopes m1 and m2, then m1m2= -1.
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, it isn't. The gradient of the perpendicular line is 3/2. If two perpendicular lines have slopes m1 and m2, then m1m2= -1.

Sorry that is a typo error on my behalf now I have looked back.:o

The midpoints are; [4/2, - 2/2 ], [-1/2, 3/2 ]

With reference to the parametric equation I give the solution and not the original parametric equation.

So y = (3x - 8) / (2) = (3(4/2) - 8)) / (2) = -2/2

Kind regards

Casio(Thinking)
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top