Is the Intersection of Two Surfaces a Cylinder or Paraboloid in 3D?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the intersection of two surfaces defined by the equations \(x^2 + y^2 = 4\) and \(z = xy\). Participants are exploring how to represent this intersection as a vector function and whether polar coordinates are necessary for the solution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss different parametrizations of the intersection, with some suggesting polar coordinates as a natural choice due to the cylindrical nature of the first surface. Others express confusion about the necessity of polar coordinates versus Cartesian coordinates.

Discussion Status

The conversation is active, with participants providing various perspectives on the parametrization of the intersection. Some have offered guidance on the use of polar coordinates, while others are questioning the implications of their current approaches and the definitions of the surfaces involved.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the interpretation of the equations as representing a cylinder versus a paraboloid in three-dimensional space. Participants are also reflecting on the implications of their chosen coordinate systems on the representation of the intersection.

0kelvin
Messages
50
Reaction score
5
I'm given equations of surfaces and asked for the vector function that represents the intersection of the two surfaces.

For ex: $$x^2 + y^2 = 4$$ and $$z = xy$$

In the solutions manual the answer is given like this: a sum of terms of cos t and sin t (is this polar form?). The way I did wasn't using cos t. I isolated y, substituted in z = xy and assumed x = t. Which resulted in something like this r(t) = (... , ... , ...). This form should be the same thing as r(t) = ai + bj + ck.

Do I have to use polar coordinates in this exercise? I believe that I went cartesian coordinates in my solution. (not forgetting that ## y = \pm \sqrt{4 - x^2}##)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You apparently don't have to use polar coordinates, but they are the obvious best choice because you have a cylinder. You have ##x = 2\cos t,~y=2\sin t## and put ##z## in terms of them and you get a parametric curve.
 
The usual parametrization of x^2 + y^2 = a^2 is (x,y) = (a\cos t, a \sin t). This avoids ambiguities over the signs of square roots.

This parametrization is in cartesian coordinates; in polar coordinates it would be (r,\theta) = (a, t).
 
##r(t) = (t, \pm \sqrt{4 - t^2}, \pm t \sqrt{4 - t^2})## is correct?
 
uhm? Are you saying that r(t) means Radius as a function of t? I didn't use "r" as "radius".

Using polar coordinates as in the book, the answer is r(t) = (2 cos t, 2 sin t, 4 cos t sin t). Because radius = 2.
 
0kelvin said:
uhm? Are you saying that r(t) means Radius as a function of t? I didn't use "r" as "radius".

Using polar coordinates as in the book, the answer is r(t) = (2 cos t, 2 sin t, 4 cos t sin t). Because radius = 2.

Since ##r## is commonly used as a notation for a polar coordinate, if you mean your ##r## to be a position vector you should embelish the notation and use either ##\vec{r}## or the bold-face form ##\bf r##.
 
I just realized what is wrong with my solution in cartesian coordinates. If I isolate like this ##y = \sqrt{4 - x^2}##, I'm looking at the equation as a circle, not as a cylinder. For it to be a cylinder I have to do this: ##x^2 + y^2 - 4 = z##, where z = f(x,y,z). Now it's a surface in 3D.
 
0kelvin said:
I just realized what is wrong with my solution in cartesian coordinates. If I isolate like this ##y = \sqrt{4 - x^2}##, I'm looking at the equation as a circle, not as a cylinder. For it to be a cylinder I have to do this: ##x^2 + y^2 - 4 = z##, where z = f(x,y,z). Now it's a surface in 3D.
No, that is absolutely incorrect. That equation isn't a cylinder, it's a paraboloid. ##x^2 + y^2 =4## is a circle in 2D but a cylinder in 3D.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K