How reconstitute a conic equation by 4 roots?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bruno Tolentino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Roots
Bruno Tolentino
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Given two points in x-axis, a and b, is possible formulate a quadratic equation whose roots intersects a and b: (x-a)(x-b)=0

So, is possible make the same with a conic equation? Given 4 points, two in x-axis (a and b) and two in y-axis (c and d), is possible reconstitute a conic equation whose roots in x and y are a, b, c and d?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Bruno Tolentino said:
Given two points in x-axis, a and b, is possible formulate a quadratic equation whose roots intersects a and b: (x-a)(x-b)=0
Not uniquely. This is x^2- (a+ b)x+ ab= 0. Multiplying the entire equation by any non-zero number gives another quadratic equation having the same roots.
If you want the quadratic function with leading coefficient 1, given by y= x^2+ bx+ c then you need to determine two values, a and b. That requires two linear equations which you can get by replacing x and y with values of two points, not just where the graph crosses the x-axis.

So, is possible make the same with a conic equation? Given 4 points, two in x-axis (a and b) and two in y-axis (c and d), is possible reconstitute a conic equation whose roots in x and y are a, b, c and d?
A general conic is of the form ax^2+ bxy+ cy^2+ dx+ ey+ f= 0. Even assuming a= 1 we have five coefficients, b, c, d, e, and f, to determine. That will require five points, not just four.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Not uniquely. This is x^2- (a+ b)x+ ab= 0. Multiplying the entire equation by any non-zero number gives another quadratic equation having the same roots.
If you want the quadratic function with leading coefficient 1, given by y= x^2+ bx+ c then you need to determine two values, a and b. That requires two linear equations which you can get by replacing x and y with values of two points, not just where the graph crosses the x-axis. A general conic is of the form ax^2+ bxy+ cy^2+ dx+ ey+ f= 0. Even assuming a= 1 we have five coefficients, b, c, d, e, and f, to determine. That will require five points, not just four.

I want ANY conic equantion that intersects a, b, c and d! And, more importante: I want to write this conic in the format (x-a)(x-b) + (y-c)(y-d) + (x-a)(x-d) = 0! Or, in some format like this...
 
Bruno Tolentino said:
I want ANY conic equantion that intersects a, b, c and d! And, more importante: I want to write this conic in the format (x-a)(x-b) + (y-c)(y-d) + (x-a)(x-d) = 0! Or, in some format like this...
Since you know what "conics" are, surely you know that the graphs of conics are one of:
ellipse,
circle,
parabola,
hyperbola,
a single straight line,
two parallel straight lines,
two intersecting straight lines.
(The last three are "degenerate conics")

NONE of those cross the x-axis (or any horizontal straight line) more than twice so what you are asking for is impossible.
 
Bruno Tolentino said:
Given two points in x-axis, a and b, is possible formulate a quadratic equation whose roots intersects a and b: (x-a)(x-b)=0

So, is possible make the same with a conic equation? Given 4 points, two in x-axis (a and b) and two in y-axis (c and d), is possible reconstitute a conic equation whose roots in x and y are a, b, c and d?
I don't believe HallsOfIvy read your question correctly. Given two x-intercepts a and b, and two y-intercepts c and d, there are many conics that meet this requirement: circles, ellipses, and hyperbolas. The only conic that doesn't satisfy the requirements is a parabola.
 
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.
Back
Top