Parametric to Polar Conversion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zach Knight
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Parametric Polar
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on converting parametric equations x=x(t) and y=y(t) into a polar form r=r(θ). The initial approach involves solving one equation for t and substituting it into the other, but concerns arise about the validity of this method due to potential issues with the existence of inverses. A more standard method is suggested, which involves eliminating the parameter t directly and using polar coordinate identities. Additionally, the conversation touches on the challenge of formulating a differential equation in terms of θ, with attempts to rewrite it using unit vectors. Overall, the participants explore the complexities of parametric to polar conversions and the implications for solving related differential equations.
Zach Knight
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Convert the two equations x=x(t) and y=y(t) to a polar equation of the form r=r(\theta)


Homework Equations


x=r*cos(\theta)
y=r*sin(\theta)
r^{2}=x^{2}+y^2


The Attempt at a Solution


Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, but in order to eliminate the parameter t, I solved one of the two parametric equations, say x(t), for t, giving an equation t=t(x). I then substituted this equation into y(t), giving y=y(t(x)). Afterward, I used the identities listed above to convert y to r. Is this valid? Is there a way to do this without having to invert one of the functions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Zach Knight said:

Homework Statement


Convert the two equations x=x(t) and y=y(t) to a polar equation of the form r=r(\theta)


Homework Equations


x=r*cos(\theta)
y=r*sin(\theta)
r^{2}=x^{2}+y^2


The Attempt at a Solution


Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, but in order to eliminate the parameter t, I solved one of the two parametric equations, say x(t), for t, giving an equation t=t(x). I then substituted this equation into y(t), giving y=y(t(x)). Afterward, I used the identities listed above to convert y to r. Is this valid? Is there a way to do this without having to invert one of the functions?
It doesn't seem valid to me. For one thing, when you solve for t in terms of x, you are finding the inverse of the original function, which may or may not exist. For example, if x = f(t) = t2 + 3, f is not one-to-one, so doesn't have an inverse.

The usual approach is to eliminate the parameter t, and then replace x and y using the identities you show.

For example, if x = t and y = t2, x2 - y = t2 - t2 = 0,
so r2cos2(theta) - rsin(theta) = 0.

This is equivalent to rcos2(theta) - sin(theta) = 0, or r = sin(theta)/cos2(theta), so here we have r as a function of theta. Eliminating one factor of r is legitimate in this case since there is at least one value of theta for which sin(theta)/cos2(theta) = 0 (namely theta = 0, and others), so we haven't lost any solutions by getting rid of the factor of r.

There is one conversion formula that you didn't show, that is sometimes useful: theta = tan-1(y/x).
 
But where are your parametric equations you want to convert to polar coordinates? x= rcos(\theta) and y= r sin(\theta) are NOT parametric equations- they are true for all points in the plane.
 
The thing is, I don't have the parametric equations; I'm trying to find them via a differential equation. I'm trying to formulate
\frac{d^2\vec{r}}{dt^2}=\frac{-MG}{|r|^3}\vec{r}
in terms of \theta because the only way I could find to solve the above equation was to assume |r| was a constant. I think I have it now though. I rewrote the problem in terms of the unit vector
\hat{r}=cos(\theta)\hat{i}+sin(\theta)\hat{j}
and got
(\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}-r(\frac{d\theta}{dt})^2)\hat{r}+(2\frac{dr}{dt}\frac{d\theta}{dt}+r\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2})\frac{d\hat{r}}{dt} = \frac{-MG}{r^2}\hat{r},
a differential equation I think I can actually solve.
Sorry if any of the math or notation is wrong; I haven't had a calculus class yet, so my education isn't very formalized yet.
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...

Similar threads

Back
Top