How to graph a self-drawing line?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3D_Mind
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph Line
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the concept of graphing a self-drawing line, specifically using the equation y=x in a stepwise manner. The idea is to create a program that allows users to adjust a parameter, r, to extend or contract the line segment dynamically. The user seeks to develop a method for graphing multiple parameterized functions that can interact, such as colliding or reflecting off each other. There is a desire to capture the behavior of these lines over time, creating a record of their interactions as the parameter changes. The conversation hints at the potential need for calculus to manage the interactions between lines as they evolve.
3D_Mind
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, this is my first post here so please be kind. I have had an idea of sorts ricocheting inside of my skull for the last two weeks and wanted to see if it had any merit or was dumb. Basically, my "idea" was what would happen if one could graph, say, y=x (for simplicity, where x>0) in a series of "steps".

For example, at, say, t=1, the line y=x would actually be a line segment from 0<x<1, then at t=2, it would "draw" out to now be a segment of y=x from 0<x<2, and so on. It could "jump" like this or draw with an arbitrary level of resolution (ie, in increments of 0.1, or 0.01 or whatever, instead of 1).

If I was to instead "turn the knob" backwards and reduce t, it would "un-draw". Basically, I could adjust t and have the graph extend or contract by some arbitrary but related amount. If this makes sense, how would I go about formally writing this out? I was thinking of using parametric equations but they don't quite behave how I want them too. Thoughts? Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The parameteric equations, x = t, y = t, 0 <= t <= r, define a line segment from (0, 0), to (r, r). If you "turn the knob" by putting in a larger value of r, the line segment gets longer. If you dial it back by putting in a smaller value of r, you get a shorter line segment.

Conceivably you could have a simple graphics program with a user interface that would let you enter a value of r, and the program would draw the line. After it had drawn one line segment, you could enter a new value of r. If larger, the program would extend the line. If you entered a smaller value of r, the program could draw part of the line in the background color, thereby erasing or "undrawing" part of the line.

I did some Java applets that were a little like this about 15 years ago.
 
Ok, thanks! I kinda saw that as I was writing up my post. I guess that will do for now but I was kinda hoping for a way to write an expression or function or equation that does the same thing without needing to adjust the stated domain directly. I am not sure why I would want that though, maybe it does not matter.

The idea of a graphing program that would do this is actually something I would like to find (for free). What I ultimately want is to graph multiple parametrized functions in this way.

Then, I want to find a way, as simply as possible, of having the lines "collide" and/or "reflect" off of each-other. So by a few simple functions and some rule for the collision one could allow for complex behavior to evolve as r-->inf. Not only that, but as a consequence, a "record" of all of these events and behaviors would be "stored" via simply looking up any value of r to see a "frame" or snapshot of the graph at that "time". This would also allow for the idea of a particular line "getting there" before another. The lines could even reflect off of themselves as the graph gets more crowded. Basically, as the function segments get drawn out, they act like impenetrable barriers that reflect any incoming lines by some rule. I'm thinking Calculus would be needed to evolve r so that a line would not "jump" over another, in some conceivable cases, instead of colliding, due to insufficient "resolution". Or, maybe I should just do my math homework!
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top