How to show that the angle at intersections of concentric ellipses with a radial line is constant?












1












$begingroup$


I'm looking for a proof that the angle at intersections of concentric ellipses with a radial line remains constant as you move from one concentric ellipse to another.



For example, a series of concentric ellipses of different sizes are centered on a point of origin.
The radial lines from the point of origin outwards that trace the semi-major and semi-minor axis of the concentric ellipses only form right-angles at each intersection with the concentric ellipses.



How may one show that the other radial lines forming non-perpendicular intersections with the concentric circles form a constant angle with respect to the same radial line?






geometry conic-sections







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:15










  • $begingroup$
    To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:23










  • $begingroup$
    I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27












  • $begingroup$
    But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:56


















1












$begingroup$


I'm looking for a proof that the angle at intersections of concentric ellipses with a radial line remains constant as you move from one concentric ellipse to another.



For example, a series of concentric ellipses of different sizes are centered on a point of origin.
The radial lines from the point of origin outwards that trace the semi-major and semi-minor axis of the concentric ellipses only form right-angles at each intersection with the concentric ellipses.



How may one show that the other radial lines forming non-perpendicular intersections with the concentric circles form a constant angle with respect to the same radial line?






geometry conic-sections







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:15










  • $begingroup$
    To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:23










  • $begingroup$
    I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27












  • $begingroup$
    But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:56
















1












1








1





$begingroup$


I'm looking for a proof that the angle at intersections of concentric ellipses with a radial line remains constant as you move from one concentric ellipse to another.



For example, a series of concentric ellipses of different sizes are centered on a point of origin.
The radial lines from the point of origin outwards that trace the semi-major and semi-minor axis of the concentric ellipses only form right-angles at each intersection with the concentric ellipses.



How may one show that the other radial lines forming non-perpendicular intersections with the concentric circles form a constant angle with respect to the same radial line?






geometry conic-sections







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm looking for a proof that the angle at intersections of concentric ellipses with a radial line remains constant as you move from one concentric ellipse to another.



For example, a series of concentric ellipses of different sizes are centered on a point of origin.
The radial lines from the point of origin outwards that trace the semi-major and semi-minor axis of the concentric ellipses only form right-angles at each intersection with the concentric ellipses.



How may one show that the other radial lines forming non-perpendicular intersections with the concentric circles form a constant angle with respect to the same radial line?






geometry conic-sections




geometry conic-sections






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 27 '18 at 10:26







Owen

















asked Dec 27 '18 at 9:55









OwenOwen

62




62












  • $begingroup$
    I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:15










  • $begingroup$
    To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:23










  • $begingroup$
    I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27












  • $begingroup$
    But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:56




















  • $begingroup$
    I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:15










  • $begingroup$
    To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:23










  • $begingroup$
    I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
    $endgroup$
    – Owen
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27












  • $begingroup$
    But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 10:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:56


















$begingroup$
I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
$endgroup$
– Owen
Dec 27 '18 at 10:15




$begingroup$
I hope my edit above clarifies and adds some context to the geometry proof problem. Thanks
$endgroup$
– Owen
Dec 27 '18 at 10:15












$begingroup$
To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 10:23




$begingroup$
To be clear: The angles are formed by the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection, yes? If so, then "concentric" is clearly not enough of a constraint. A circle is an ellipse, and the tangent at the intersection with any radial line makes a right angle, where this isn't true for a non-circle ellipse. So, the ellipses need the same eccentricity. Moreover, you not only want the centers aligned, but you want the major and minor axes to be aligned; otherwise, one ellipse could be rotated with respect to another, throwing-off the property you describe.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 10:23












$begingroup$
I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
$endgroup$
– Owen
Dec 27 '18 at 10:27






$begingroup$
I see, yes. The angles are between the radial line and the tangent lines to the ellipses at the points of intersection. The concentric ellipses also have the same eccentricity, and have semi-major and semi-minor axes aligned.
$endgroup$
– Owen
Dec 27 '18 at 10:27














$begingroup$
But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 10:27






$begingroup$
But then ... Ellipses with the same eccentricity are similar. Arranging them with a common center, and aligning their axes, we have that a simple dilation transformation carries any one ellipse to any other (and fixes any radial line); since dilations preserve angles, we're done.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 10:27






1




1




$begingroup$
The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 27 '18 at 12:56






$begingroup$
The facts that all ellipses have the same eccentricity and that their axes are aligned are vital and should be edited into the question itself, not buried in the comments.
$endgroup$
– David K
Dec 27 '18 at 12:56












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

If someone is not convinced by dilation argument, you can also prove the fact in the following way:



The equation of ellipse is:



$$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$



So the slope of the tangent is:



$$frac{x}{a^2}+frac{yy'}{b^2}=0$$



$$y'=-frac{b^2x}{a^2y}tag{1}$$



Now draw two ellipses with semi-axis $(a_1,b_1)$ and $(a_2,b_2)$. For concentric ellipses (with the same center and eccentricity):



$$frac{b_1}{a_1}=frac{b_2}{a_2}tag{2}$$



Draw a line $p$ passing through origin intersecting ellipses in points $(x_1,y_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2)$. Obviously:



$$frac{x_1}{y_1}=frac{x_2}{y_2}tag{3}$$



By combining (1), (2) and (3):



$$y_1'=-frac{b_1^2x_1}{a_1^2y_1}=-frac{b_2^2x_2}{a_2^2y_2}=y_2'$$



So both tangents have the same slopes which means that the tangents are parallel and therefore their angles with respect to line $p$ must be equal.



EDIT: I have assumed that concentric ellipses must have the same center and the same eccentricity. Eccentricity of an ellipse is defined with:



$$e=sqrt{1-frac{b^2}{a^2}}$$



So two ellipses with the same center are concentric only if (2) holds.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:01










  • $begingroup$
    @Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:16










  • $begingroup$
    "con-centric" = "same center".
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:24










  • $begingroup$
    True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:41














Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053758%2fhow-to-show-that-the-angle-at-intersections-of-concentric-ellipses-with-a-radial%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0












$begingroup$

If someone is not convinced by dilation argument, you can also prove the fact in the following way:



The equation of ellipse is:



$$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$



So the slope of the tangent is:



$$frac{x}{a^2}+frac{yy'}{b^2}=0$$



$$y'=-frac{b^2x}{a^2y}tag{1}$$



Now draw two ellipses with semi-axis $(a_1,b_1)$ and $(a_2,b_2)$. For concentric ellipses (with the same center and eccentricity):



$$frac{b_1}{a_1}=frac{b_2}{a_2}tag{2}$$



Draw a line $p$ passing through origin intersecting ellipses in points $(x_1,y_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2)$. Obviously:



$$frac{x_1}{y_1}=frac{x_2}{y_2}tag{3}$$



By combining (1), (2) and (3):



$$y_1'=-frac{b_1^2x_1}{a_1^2y_1}=-frac{b_2^2x_2}{a_2^2y_2}=y_2'$$



So both tangents have the same slopes which means that the tangents are parallel and therefore their angles with respect to line $p$ must be equal.



EDIT: I have assumed that concentric ellipses must have the same center and the same eccentricity. Eccentricity of an ellipse is defined with:



$$e=sqrt{1-frac{b^2}{a^2}}$$



So two ellipses with the same center are concentric only if (2) holds.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:01










  • $begingroup$
    @Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:16










  • $begingroup$
    "con-centric" = "same center".
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:24










  • $begingroup$
    True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:41


















0












$begingroup$

If someone is not convinced by dilation argument, you can also prove the fact in the following way:



The equation of ellipse is:



$$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$



So the slope of the tangent is:



$$frac{x}{a^2}+frac{yy'}{b^2}=0$$



$$y'=-frac{b^2x}{a^2y}tag{1}$$



Now draw two ellipses with semi-axis $(a_1,b_1)$ and $(a_2,b_2)$. For concentric ellipses (with the same center and eccentricity):



$$frac{b_1}{a_1}=frac{b_2}{a_2}tag{2}$$



Draw a line $p$ passing through origin intersecting ellipses in points $(x_1,y_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2)$. Obviously:



$$frac{x_1}{y_1}=frac{x_2}{y_2}tag{3}$$



By combining (1), (2) and (3):



$$y_1'=-frac{b_1^2x_1}{a_1^2y_1}=-frac{b_2^2x_2}{a_2^2y_2}=y_2'$$



So both tangents have the same slopes which means that the tangents are parallel and therefore their angles with respect to line $p$ must be equal.



EDIT: I have assumed that concentric ellipses must have the same center and the same eccentricity. Eccentricity of an ellipse is defined with:



$$e=sqrt{1-frac{b^2}{a^2}}$$



So two ellipses with the same center are concentric only if (2) holds.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:01










  • $begingroup$
    @Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:16










  • $begingroup$
    "con-centric" = "same center".
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:24










  • $begingroup$
    True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:41
















0












0








0





$begingroup$

If someone is not convinced by dilation argument, you can also prove the fact in the following way:



The equation of ellipse is:



$$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$



So the slope of the tangent is:



$$frac{x}{a^2}+frac{yy'}{b^2}=0$$



$$y'=-frac{b^2x}{a^2y}tag{1}$$



Now draw two ellipses with semi-axis $(a_1,b_1)$ and $(a_2,b_2)$. For concentric ellipses (with the same center and eccentricity):



$$frac{b_1}{a_1}=frac{b_2}{a_2}tag{2}$$



Draw a line $p$ passing through origin intersecting ellipses in points $(x_1,y_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2)$. Obviously:



$$frac{x_1}{y_1}=frac{x_2}{y_2}tag{3}$$



By combining (1), (2) and (3):



$$y_1'=-frac{b_1^2x_1}{a_1^2y_1}=-frac{b_2^2x_2}{a_2^2y_2}=y_2'$$



So both tangents have the same slopes which means that the tangents are parallel and therefore their angles with respect to line $p$ must be equal.



EDIT: I have assumed that concentric ellipses must have the same center and the same eccentricity. Eccentricity of an ellipse is defined with:



$$e=sqrt{1-frac{b^2}{a^2}}$$



So two ellipses with the same center are concentric only if (2) holds.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



If someone is not convinced by dilation argument, you can also prove the fact in the following way:



The equation of ellipse is:



$$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$



So the slope of the tangent is:



$$frac{x}{a^2}+frac{yy'}{b^2}=0$$



$$y'=-frac{b^2x}{a^2y}tag{1}$$



Now draw two ellipses with semi-axis $(a_1,b_1)$ and $(a_2,b_2)$. For concentric ellipses (with the same center and eccentricity):



$$frac{b_1}{a_1}=frac{b_2}{a_2}tag{2}$$



Draw a line $p$ passing through origin intersecting ellipses in points $(x_1,y_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2)$. Obviously:



$$frac{x_1}{y_1}=frac{x_2}{y_2}tag{3}$$



By combining (1), (2) and (3):



$$y_1'=-frac{b_1^2x_1}{a_1^2y_1}=-frac{b_2^2x_2}{a_2^2y_2}=y_2'$$



So both tangents have the same slopes which means that the tangents are parallel and therefore their angles with respect to line $p$ must be equal.



EDIT: I have assumed that concentric ellipses must have the same center and the same eccentricity. Eccentricity of an ellipse is defined with:



$$e=sqrt{1-frac{b^2}{a^2}}$$



So two ellipses with the same center are concentric only if (2) holds.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Dec 27 '18 at 12:21

























answered Dec 27 '18 at 11:51









OldboyOldboy

9,42111138




9,42111138












  • $begingroup$
    Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:01










  • $begingroup$
    @Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:16










  • $begingroup$
    "con-centric" = "same center".
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:24










  • $begingroup$
    True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:41




















  • $begingroup$
    Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:01










  • $begingroup$
    @Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:16










  • $begingroup$
    "con-centric" = "same center".
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:24










  • $begingroup$
    True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
    $endgroup$
    – Oldboy
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:27








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:41


















$begingroup$
Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:01




$begingroup$
Equation $(2)$ asserts the similarity (and axis-alignment) of the ellipses, not the concentricity. Using the standard form of the ellipse equation guarantees that they have the same center.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:01












$begingroup$
@Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
$endgroup$
– Oldboy
Dec 27 '18 at 12:16




$begingroup$
@Blue: What is your definition of "concentric ellipses"?
$endgroup$
– Oldboy
Dec 27 '18 at 12:16












$begingroup$
"con-centric" = "same center".
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:24




$begingroup$
"con-centric" = "same center".
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:24












$begingroup$
True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
$endgroup$
– Oldboy
Dec 27 '18 at 12:27






$begingroup$
True for circles, but that would mean that ellipses $x^2+y^2/100=1$ and $x^2/100+y^2=1$ are concentric too. It does not make any sense (at least to me) and it also invalidates the problem statement completely.
$endgroup$
– Oldboy
Dec 27 '18 at 12:27






1




1




$begingroup$
Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:41






$begingroup$
Whether the problem statement makes sense isn't relevant, as the author wasn't particularly precise in making that statement in the first place. Even so, I'd resist overloading "concentric" with shape information; we have "similar" to describe matching shapes. (Note that the problem also requires that the ellipses in question have the same orientation, which even the overloaded "concentric" misses ... unless we further overload the term to cover orientation.) Compare "confocal", used for arbitrarily-eccentric conics that share foci; "same shape"-ness is not part of the definition.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 27 '18 at 12:41




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053758%2fhow-to-show-that-the-angle-at-intersections-of-concentric-ellipses-with-a-radial%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Bundesstraße 106

Image
Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland. Zur gleichnamigen Straße in Österreich siehe Mölltal Straße. Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße/Wartung/DE-B Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland Karte Basisdaten Betreiber: Deutschland  Bundesrepublik Deutschland Straßenbeginn: Wismar ( 53° 54′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.900536 11.396875 ) Straßenende: Schwerin ( 53° 36′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.592785 11.404892 ) Gesamtlänge: 40,7 km Bundesland: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Ausbauzustand: zweistreifig [1] Bundesstraße 106 in Schwerin (Umgehungsstraße) Straßenverlauf Land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Landkreis Nordwestmecklenburg Ortsumgehung Wismar Wallensteingraben über   Dorf Mecklenburg Wallensteingraben Groß Stieten Bad Kleinen OT Niendorf Bahnstrecke Lübeck–Bad Kleinen Zickhusen Lübstorf Klein Trebbow OT Kirch Stück
Read more

Verónica Boquete

Image
Verónica Boquete im Trikot der Nationalmannschaft (2013) Personalia Name Verónica Boquete Giadans Geburtstag 9. April 1987 Geburtsort Santiago de Compostela, Spanien Größe 159 cm Position Mittelfeld / Sturm Juniorinnen Jahre Station 2001–2005 Xuventú Aguiño Frauen Jahre Station Spiele (Tore) 1 2005–2008 Prainsa Zaragoza 83 (40) 2008–2010 Espanyol Barcelona 53 (30) 2010 Buffalo Flash 9 0 (9) 2010 Chicago Red Stars 3 0 (1) 2010–2011 Espanyol Barcelona 26 (41) 2011 Philadelphia Independence 13 0 (5) 2011 Energija Woronesch 5 0 (1) 2012–2014 Tyresö FF 39 (14) 2014 Portland Thorns FC 15 0 (4) 2014–2015 1. FFC Frankfurt 23 0 (7) 2015–2016 FC Bayern München 9 0 (0) 2016–2018 Paris Saint-Germain 31 0 (8) 2018 Peking BG Phoenix 2019– Utah Royals FC 0 0 (0) Nationalmannschaft Jahre Auswahl
Read more

Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

Image
Die Lage des Ida-Boy-Ed-Gartens, rot markiert Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten, Blick von der Wakenitzmauer durch das Tor in der Stadtmauer Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten ist eine Straße der Lübecker Altstadt. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Lage 2 Geschichte 3 Literatur 4 Weblinks Lage | Der etwa 90 Meter lange Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten befindet sich an der nördlichen Spitze der Altstadtinsel, vor dem Burgtor. Die in einem Bogen durch eine Grünanlage hangaufwärts führende Straße verbindet die Wakenitzmauer mit der Burgtorbrücke. Geschichte | Der heutige Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten wurde ursprünglich als Verlängerung der Wakenitzmauer angelegt. 1903 wurde in den erhaltenen Teil der mittelalterlichen Stadtmauer, an dem die Wakenitzmauer bei der Einmündung der Kaiserstraße begann, ein Tor mit einem großen Bogen für die Durchführung der Straße und zwei kleineren seitlichen Öffnungen für Fußgänger gebrochen, um für die neu errichteten Wohnhäuser in diesem Bereich
Read more