[math-fun] Siebeck's Theorem (was Q re ellipses in the complex plane)
My point is that the ellipses for c > 0 do not approach the line segment [-1,1]. They approach the line segment [-sqrt(⅓), sqrt(⅓)]. --Dan From: Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> Subject: Re: [math-fun] Q re ellipses in the complex plane Date: 18 February, 2013 5:19:14 PM PST ----- . . . I hadn't thought it possible that an ellipse could approach a line segment while still keeping its foci away from the line segment ends, but I was wrong! . . . ----- On 2013-02-19, at 4:33 PM, Henry Baker wrote:
Re: "This is not what happens":
Tell that to Maxima. P(z) has roots at +-1, +ci.
P'(z) has roots at +ci/3+-sqrt(3-c^2)/3 = +-1/sqrt(3) when c=0.
(%i1) declare(z,complex); (%o1) done (%i2) P(z):=(z-1)*(z+1)*(z-%i*c); (%o2) P(z) := (z - 1) (z + 1) (z - %i c) (%i3) solve(P(z),z); (%o3) [z = %i c, z = - 1, z = 1] (%i4) solve(diff(P(z),z),z); 2 2 sqrt(3 - c ) - %i c sqrt(3 - c ) + %i c (%o4) [z = - -------------------, z = -------------------] 3 3 (%i5) %,c=0; 1 1 (%o5) [z = - -------, z = -------] sqrt(3) sqrt(3) (%i6) %,numer; (%o6) [z = - 0.57735026918963, z = 0.57735026918963]
I.e., these numbers are not +-1.
At 03:33 PM 2/19/2013, Dan Asimov wrote:
This is not what happens.
The limit of the ellipse as c -> 0 is indeed a degenerate ellipse that is precisely the line segment between its foci, +-sqrt(â…“).
"DA" == Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> writes:
DA> My point is that the ellipses for c > 0 DA> do not approach the line segment [-1,1]. DA> They approach the line segment [-sqrt(⅓), sqrt(⅓)]. My question, based on Henry's first post on the theorem, can be summarized as: What do they approach? Is it [-1,1]? And why? Clearly not. My resulting hypothesis is: if one looks at the ellipse geometrically, via the pins and string method of drawing one, is it perhaps the case that the string's length remains constant as the triangle/ellipse collapse? Which would be the case if the minor radius goes to zero without any change to the major radius. Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conic_Section, the details are quite a bit different that what was presented when I last studied. Directrix, latus rectum and 'linear eccentricity', as opposed to eccentricity are all new to me. Given the above ellipse, might the directrices be the lines yi+1 and yi-1, y \in R? -JimC -- James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
participants (2)
-
Dan Asimov -
James Cloos