Converting Tricky Parametric Equations into a Single Function | Tips & Tricks

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gagle The Terrible
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Parametric
AI Thread Summary
To convert the given parametric equations X(t) = t^2 + t + 1 and Y(t) = t^2 - t + 1 into a single function f(x,y) = 0, one can utilize the relationship X - Y = 2t. Instead of explicitly solving the quadratics for t, it is suggested to express t in terms of x and y using the equation t = (x - y) / 2. This substitution allows for the conversion without needing to deal with imaginary roots or complex quadratic solutions. The approach simplifies the process of finding the desired function. The discussion emphasizes the effectiveness of substitution over direct solving of the equations.
Gagle The Terrible
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
I would like to convert these parametric equations into a single
f(x,y) = 0 function.

X(t) = t^2 + t + 1
Y(t) = t^2 - t +1

In fact, what stops me is the imaginary roots of the parametric polynomials.

Is there a way to get around the seemingly impossible explicit solving of the quadratics to isolate either X or Y ?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Note that x - t = y + t (or just subtract y(t) from x(t)).
 
Last edited:
Gagle The Terrible said:
I would like to convert these parametric equations into a single
f(x,y) = 0 function.

X(t) = t^2 + t + 1
Y(t) = t^2 - t +1

In fact, what stops me is the imaginary roots of the parametric polynomials.

Is there a way to get around the seemingly impossible explicit solving of the quadratics to isolate either X or Y ?

First note that X - Y = 2t, but also notice that these are both quadratic equations so you can solve one of them or the other to find t in terms of X or Y and then substitute this into X - Y = 2t or the equation for the other variable.
 
You just want to substitute t = (x - y) / 2. There's no need to solve any quadratics.
 
0rthodontist said:
You just want to substitute t = (x - y) / 2. There's no need to solve any quadratics.

Darn, I guess I should have seen that since I did notice that x - y = 2t.
 
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...

Similar threads

Back
Top