How many points are needed to uniquely define an ellipse?












15














I recently asked a question on this forum regarding why 3 points guaranteed the presence or absence of a unique equation representing a specific circle.



(link here What do "3 different points" have to do with linear dependence in determining a unique circle?)



Shortly after this, I came across a question in my book that provided a picture of 4 red dots (image below) and asked, "How many ellipses do these 4 red points define". Having read the comments on my post with the circle, I thought that this was fairly straight forward.



I chose " 1 ".



This was wrong. The answer was infinite. This caught me as surprising as I didn't think of the equations for a circle and an ellipse as differing by much beyond a scaling factor for each quadratic term.



I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows:



$$left(frac{x-h}aright)^2 + left(frac{y-k}bright)^2 = 1$$



The only thing I can think of is that because of the added scaling factors, there are now technically two additional unknowns (for a total of 4 different unknowns... h, a, k, and b), and therefore I need 4 points to specify an unique ellipse.



However, I thought to myself again, even if the ellipse is not centered at the origin, if all 4 given points happened to coincide with the intersection between the major axis and the ellipse and the minor axis and the ellipse, then certainly that would specify an unique ellipse.



If this is true, then why does the arrangement of the points matter in determining whether or not an unique ellipse is specified?



Visual explanations would be greatly appreciated!



Picture of 4 Red Points










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 4




    The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
    – Shubham Johri
    yesterday












  • see GeoGebra Classic icon
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    yesterday






  • 1




    Search the site for "five points conic".
    – Blue
    yesterday






  • 1




    If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
    – TonyK
    17 hours ago












  • 4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
    – user45266
    14 hours ago
















15














I recently asked a question on this forum regarding why 3 points guaranteed the presence or absence of a unique equation representing a specific circle.



(link here What do "3 different points" have to do with linear dependence in determining a unique circle?)



Shortly after this, I came across a question in my book that provided a picture of 4 red dots (image below) and asked, "How many ellipses do these 4 red points define". Having read the comments on my post with the circle, I thought that this was fairly straight forward.



I chose " 1 ".



This was wrong. The answer was infinite. This caught me as surprising as I didn't think of the equations for a circle and an ellipse as differing by much beyond a scaling factor for each quadratic term.



I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows:



$$left(frac{x-h}aright)^2 + left(frac{y-k}bright)^2 = 1$$



The only thing I can think of is that because of the added scaling factors, there are now technically two additional unknowns (for a total of 4 different unknowns... h, a, k, and b), and therefore I need 4 points to specify an unique ellipse.



However, I thought to myself again, even if the ellipse is not centered at the origin, if all 4 given points happened to coincide with the intersection between the major axis and the ellipse and the minor axis and the ellipse, then certainly that would specify an unique ellipse.



If this is true, then why does the arrangement of the points matter in determining whether or not an unique ellipse is specified?



Visual explanations would be greatly appreciated!



Picture of 4 Red Points










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 4




    The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
    – Shubham Johri
    yesterday












  • see GeoGebra Classic icon
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    yesterday






  • 1




    Search the site for "five points conic".
    – Blue
    yesterday






  • 1




    If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
    – TonyK
    17 hours ago












  • 4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
    – user45266
    14 hours ago














15












15








15


1





I recently asked a question on this forum regarding why 3 points guaranteed the presence or absence of a unique equation representing a specific circle.



(link here What do "3 different points" have to do with linear dependence in determining a unique circle?)



Shortly after this, I came across a question in my book that provided a picture of 4 red dots (image below) and asked, "How many ellipses do these 4 red points define". Having read the comments on my post with the circle, I thought that this was fairly straight forward.



I chose " 1 ".



This was wrong. The answer was infinite. This caught me as surprising as I didn't think of the equations for a circle and an ellipse as differing by much beyond a scaling factor for each quadratic term.



I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows:



$$left(frac{x-h}aright)^2 + left(frac{y-k}bright)^2 = 1$$



The only thing I can think of is that because of the added scaling factors, there are now technically two additional unknowns (for a total of 4 different unknowns... h, a, k, and b), and therefore I need 4 points to specify an unique ellipse.



However, I thought to myself again, even if the ellipse is not centered at the origin, if all 4 given points happened to coincide with the intersection between the major axis and the ellipse and the minor axis and the ellipse, then certainly that would specify an unique ellipse.



If this is true, then why does the arrangement of the points matter in determining whether or not an unique ellipse is specified?



Visual explanations would be greatly appreciated!



Picture of 4 Red Points










share|cite|improve this question















I recently asked a question on this forum regarding why 3 points guaranteed the presence or absence of a unique equation representing a specific circle.



(link here What do "3 different points" have to do with linear dependence in determining a unique circle?)



Shortly after this, I came across a question in my book that provided a picture of 4 red dots (image below) and asked, "How many ellipses do these 4 red points define". Having read the comments on my post with the circle, I thought that this was fairly straight forward.



I chose " 1 ".



This was wrong. The answer was infinite. This caught me as surprising as I didn't think of the equations for a circle and an ellipse as differing by much beyond a scaling factor for each quadratic term.



I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows:



$$left(frac{x-h}aright)^2 + left(frac{y-k}bright)^2 = 1$$



The only thing I can think of is that because of the added scaling factors, there are now technically two additional unknowns (for a total of 4 different unknowns... h, a, k, and b), and therefore I need 4 points to specify an unique ellipse.



However, I thought to myself again, even if the ellipse is not centered at the origin, if all 4 given points happened to coincide with the intersection between the major axis and the ellipse and the minor axis and the ellipse, then certainly that would specify an unique ellipse.



If this is true, then why does the arrangement of the points matter in determining whether or not an unique ellipse is specified?



Visual explanations would be greatly appreciated!



Picture of 4 Red Points







linear-algebra conic-sections






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









polfosol

5,56231945




5,56231945










asked yesterday









S.Cramer

1018




1018








  • 4




    The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
    – Shubham Johri
    yesterday












  • see GeoGebra Classic icon
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    yesterday






  • 1




    Search the site for "five points conic".
    – Blue
    yesterday






  • 1




    If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
    – TonyK
    17 hours ago












  • 4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
    – user45266
    14 hours ago














  • 4




    The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
    – Shubham Johri
    yesterday












  • see GeoGebra Classic icon
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    yesterday






  • 1




    Search the site for "five points conic".
    – Blue
    yesterday






  • 1




    If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
    – TonyK
    17 hours ago












  • 4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
    – user45266
    14 hours ago








4




4




The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
– Shubham Johri
yesterday






The general equation of an ellipse whose axes of symmetry are parallel to the co-ordinate axes is$$frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$$
– Shubham Johri
yesterday














see GeoGebra Classic icon
– Aleksas Domarkas
yesterday




see GeoGebra Classic icon
– Aleksas Domarkas
yesterday




1




1




Search the site for "five points conic".
– Blue
yesterday




Search the site for "five points conic".
– Blue
yesterday




1




1




If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
– TonyK
17 hours ago






If you are implicitly excluding all ellipses except those given by your "general equation", then two points are enough: one on the $x$-axis and one on the $y$-axis.
– TonyK
17 hours ago














4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
– user45266
14 hours ago




4 points won't define an ellipse; for the image you provided, imagine one that is longer horizontally than it is tall, then one that't taller than it is horizontally. Both fit with the 4 points!
– user45266
14 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















20














The equation of an ellipse is:
$$
ax^2+by^2+cxy+dx+ey+f=0
$$

Hence you need $5$ points to obtain the coefficients: $(a,b,c,d,e,f)$, assuming that the center is unknown.



If, on the the other hand, the center is known then $3$ points are enough, since every point's reflection in respect to the center is also a point of the ellipse and you technically have $6$ known points.



In this case, assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like having the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
    – S.Cramer
    yesterday






  • 1




    Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
    – Jevaut
    yesterday










  • Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
    – S.Cramer
    yesterday










  • There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
    – Jevaut
    yesterday








  • 1




    @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
    – Jevaut
    yesterday



















14














The equation $left(frac{x-h}{a}right)^2 + left( frac{y-k}{b}right)^2 = 1$ is the equation for an ellipse with major and minor axes parallel to the coordinate axes. We expect such ellipses to be unchanged under horizontal reflection and under vertical reflection through their axes. In this equation, these reflections are effected by $x mapsto 2h - x$ and $y mapsto 2k -y$.



This means, if all you have is one point on the ellipse and the three reflected images of this point, you do not have $8$ independent coordinates; you have $2$ and uninformative reflections forced by the equation.



We can see this by plotting two ellipses at the same center (same $h$ and $k$), intersecting at $4$ points, with, say, semiaxes of length $1$ and $2$.



Mathematica graphics



These clearly have four points of intersection. But as soon as you know an ellipse is centered at the origin and contains any one of the four points of intersection, by the major and minor axis reflection symmetries, it contains all four. This is still true if you use generic ellipses, which can be rotated.



Mathematica graphics



Remember that the reflections are through the major and minor axes, wherever they are.



Of course, there are other ways for two ellipses to intersect at four points.



Mathematica graphics



Mathematica graphics



So just knowing those four points are on an ellipse cannot possibly tell you which one is intended.



Returning to the first diagram, corresponding to the diagram you fave where the four known points are the vertices of a square... Symmetries force the center of the ellipse to be the center of the square, but that's not a very strong constraint.



Mathematica graphics






share|cite|improve this answer





























    10














    This is exactly the question discussed several months ago here (Chinese). The central problem is the hidden constraints put on the ellipse.



    When you claim that ellipses are determined by the equation $frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$, you are implicitly assuming that there are no 'slant' ellipses. For instance, the equation $x^2+y^2+xy=1$ also characterize an ellipse, but it is not included in your equation.



    If by 'determine' you mean that the ellipse is the unique one passing through the points, the answer is 5. Since two ellipses can intersect at four points, these 4 points cannot determine a unique one. On the other hand, you can easily construct the unique quadratic curve passing through any 5 given point.



    However, you can, in fact, use only one point to specify an ellipse. Since the set of all ellipses $E$ is equipotent to $mathbb R^5$, as discussed above, and $mathbb R^5$ is equipotent with $mathbb R^2$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $mathbb R^2$ and $E$. You can see a formal discussion here.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 8




      your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
      – uhoh
      13 hours ago








    • 3




      @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
      – lastresort
      12 hours ago










    • Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
      – Pieter Geerkens
      4 hours ago



















    6















    " I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows: $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ "




    This is not correct. The above equation defines not all the ellipses, but only the ellipses with axis parallel to the (Ox,Oy) axis.



    The general equation of ellipses is basically the general equation of quadratic curves (with constraints below) :
    $$ax^2+2bxy+cy^2+2dx+2fy+g=0$$
    where $a,b,c,d,f,g$ are constants.
    To distinguish ellipses from hyperbolas, circles and others degenerate formes also defined by the above general equation, the constrains are :
    $$Delta=begin{vmatrix}
    a & b & d \
    b & c & f \
    d & f & g
    end{vmatrix}neq 0quad;quad
    begin{vmatrix}
    a & b \
    c & d
    end{vmatrix}>0quad;quad
    frac{Delta}{a+c}<0quadtext{and}quad aneq c.$$

    They are 5 independent parameters in the above general equation. Thus five points are necessary to define a unique quadratic curve.



    Of course, given five arbitrary points doesn't guaranty that the curve will be an ellipse. One have to check that the above constrains are satisfied.



    NOTE : A more intuitive way to understand why five points are necessary, consider the equation $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ and rotate the (Ox,Oy) in order to avoid to forget the "inclined" ellipses. One more parameter is necessary (the angle of rotation). Thus, five parameters in total.






    share|cite|improve this answer































      1














      Consider a subset of the set of ellipses passing through the $4$ red points, that contains ellipses that pass through the points and are centred at $(0,0)$ with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. The general equation of an ellipse belonging to this subset is $$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$ Since the $4$ points lie on the ellipse, plug them into its equation. Notice that plugging any point generates the same equation, $$4/a^2+4/b^2=1$$ You have two unknowns $a,b$ and only one equation. This means there are infinitely many ordered pairs $(a,b)$ that satisfy the condition, hence the subset is infinite, which in turn implies the set of ellipses that pass through the given points is infinite.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday






      • 1




        Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
        – Shubham Johri
        yesterday










      • So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday






      • 1




        Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
        – Shubham Johri
        yesterday






      • 2




        There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
        – Shubham Johri
        yesterday





















      1














      Let me try:



      An ellipse is defined as the locus of a



      point $P$ s.t. the sum of distances of P to



      2 fixed points $F_1$ and $F_2$ is constant, i.e.



      $D_P:= d(P,F_1) +d(P,F_2) = c$.



      Hence with $F(x_1,y_1),F(x_2,y_2)$, and $c,$ we have $5$ parameters to determine an ellipse.



      Note : $D_P > d(F_1,F_2)$ (Why?)






      share|cite|improve this answer























        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        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%2f3063610%2fhow-many-points-are-needed-to-uniquely-define-an-ellipse%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        6 Answers
        6






        active

        oldest

        votes








        6 Answers
        6






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        20














        The equation of an ellipse is:
        $$
        ax^2+by^2+cxy+dx+ey+f=0
        $$

        Hence you need $5$ points to obtain the coefficients: $(a,b,c,d,e,f)$, assuming that the center is unknown.



        If, on the the other hand, the center is known then $3$ points are enough, since every point's reflection in respect to the center is also a point of the ellipse and you technically have $6$ known points.



        In this case, assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like having the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.






        share|cite|improve this answer























        • So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday






        • 1




          Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday










        • Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday










        • There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday








        • 1




          @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday
















        20














        The equation of an ellipse is:
        $$
        ax^2+by^2+cxy+dx+ey+f=0
        $$

        Hence you need $5$ points to obtain the coefficients: $(a,b,c,d,e,f)$, assuming that the center is unknown.



        If, on the the other hand, the center is known then $3$ points are enough, since every point's reflection in respect to the center is also a point of the ellipse and you technically have $6$ known points.



        In this case, assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like having the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.






        share|cite|improve this answer























        • So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday






        • 1




          Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday










        • Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday










        • There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday








        • 1




          @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday














        20












        20








        20






        The equation of an ellipse is:
        $$
        ax^2+by^2+cxy+dx+ey+f=0
        $$

        Hence you need $5$ points to obtain the coefficients: $(a,b,c,d,e,f)$, assuming that the center is unknown.



        If, on the the other hand, the center is known then $3$ points are enough, since every point's reflection in respect to the center is also a point of the ellipse and you technically have $6$ known points.



        In this case, assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like having the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        The equation of an ellipse is:
        $$
        ax^2+by^2+cxy+dx+ey+f=0
        $$

        Hence you need $5$ points to obtain the coefficients: $(a,b,c,d,e,f)$, assuming that the center is unknown.



        If, on the the other hand, the center is known then $3$ points are enough, since every point's reflection in respect to the center is also a point of the ellipse and you technically have $6$ known points.



        In this case, assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like having the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 7 hours ago

























        answered yesterday









        Jevaut

        948112




        948112












        • So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday






        • 1




          Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday










        • Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday










        • There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday








        • 1




          @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday


















        • So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday






        • 1




          Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday










        • Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
          – S.Cramer
          yesterday










        • There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday








        • 1




          @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
          – Jevaut
          yesterday
















        So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday




        So it seems to me that the symmetry of these points provided is the issue?
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday




        1




        1




        Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday




        Exactly. Assuming that the blue-painted point is the center, the points you've been given are symmetric in respect to it and thus it's like being given the center and $2$ points, which is not enough to uniquely determine an ellipse.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday












        Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday




        Just out of curiosity then, is it fair to say that 2 of the 4 points are "linearly dependent" on one another?
        – S.Cramer
        yesterday












        There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday






        There exist $c_1,c_2 neq 0$ s.t.: $$ c_1 cdot (-2,2) + c_2 cdot (2,-2)= 0 $$ So, yes.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday






        1




        1




        @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday




        @ShubhamJohri Right, my bad. Taking your explanation of "linear dependence of points" into account, I shall add that there are two pairs of linearly dependent red points.
        – Jevaut
        yesterday











        14














        The equation $left(frac{x-h}{a}right)^2 + left( frac{y-k}{b}right)^2 = 1$ is the equation for an ellipse with major and minor axes parallel to the coordinate axes. We expect such ellipses to be unchanged under horizontal reflection and under vertical reflection through their axes. In this equation, these reflections are effected by $x mapsto 2h - x$ and $y mapsto 2k -y$.



        This means, if all you have is one point on the ellipse and the three reflected images of this point, you do not have $8$ independent coordinates; you have $2$ and uninformative reflections forced by the equation.



        We can see this by plotting two ellipses at the same center (same $h$ and $k$), intersecting at $4$ points, with, say, semiaxes of length $1$ and $2$.



        Mathematica graphics



        These clearly have four points of intersection. But as soon as you know an ellipse is centered at the origin and contains any one of the four points of intersection, by the major and minor axis reflection symmetries, it contains all four. This is still true if you use generic ellipses, which can be rotated.



        Mathematica graphics



        Remember that the reflections are through the major and minor axes, wherever they are.



        Of course, there are other ways for two ellipses to intersect at four points.



        Mathematica graphics



        Mathematica graphics



        So just knowing those four points are on an ellipse cannot possibly tell you which one is intended.



        Returning to the first diagram, corresponding to the diagram you fave where the four known points are the vertices of a square... Symmetries force the center of the ellipse to be the center of the square, but that's not a very strong constraint.



        Mathematica graphics






        share|cite|improve this answer


























          14














          The equation $left(frac{x-h}{a}right)^2 + left( frac{y-k}{b}right)^2 = 1$ is the equation for an ellipse with major and minor axes parallel to the coordinate axes. We expect such ellipses to be unchanged under horizontal reflection and under vertical reflection through their axes. In this equation, these reflections are effected by $x mapsto 2h - x$ and $y mapsto 2k -y$.



          This means, if all you have is one point on the ellipse and the three reflected images of this point, you do not have $8$ independent coordinates; you have $2$ and uninformative reflections forced by the equation.



          We can see this by plotting two ellipses at the same center (same $h$ and $k$), intersecting at $4$ points, with, say, semiaxes of length $1$ and $2$.



          Mathematica graphics



          These clearly have four points of intersection. But as soon as you know an ellipse is centered at the origin and contains any one of the four points of intersection, by the major and minor axis reflection symmetries, it contains all four. This is still true if you use generic ellipses, which can be rotated.



          Mathematica graphics



          Remember that the reflections are through the major and minor axes, wherever they are.



          Of course, there are other ways for two ellipses to intersect at four points.



          Mathematica graphics



          Mathematica graphics



          So just knowing those four points are on an ellipse cannot possibly tell you which one is intended.



          Returning to the first diagram, corresponding to the diagram you fave where the four known points are the vertices of a square... Symmetries force the center of the ellipse to be the center of the square, but that's not a very strong constraint.



          Mathematica graphics






          share|cite|improve this answer
























            14












            14








            14






            The equation $left(frac{x-h}{a}right)^2 + left( frac{y-k}{b}right)^2 = 1$ is the equation for an ellipse with major and minor axes parallel to the coordinate axes. We expect such ellipses to be unchanged under horizontal reflection and under vertical reflection through their axes. In this equation, these reflections are effected by $x mapsto 2h - x$ and $y mapsto 2k -y$.



            This means, if all you have is one point on the ellipse and the three reflected images of this point, you do not have $8$ independent coordinates; you have $2$ and uninformative reflections forced by the equation.



            We can see this by plotting two ellipses at the same center (same $h$ and $k$), intersecting at $4$ points, with, say, semiaxes of length $1$ and $2$.



            Mathematica graphics



            These clearly have four points of intersection. But as soon as you know an ellipse is centered at the origin and contains any one of the four points of intersection, by the major and minor axis reflection symmetries, it contains all four. This is still true if you use generic ellipses, which can be rotated.



            Mathematica graphics



            Remember that the reflections are through the major and minor axes, wherever they are.



            Of course, there are other ways for two ellipses to intersect at four points.



            Mathematica graphics



            Mathematica graphics



            So just knowing those four points are on an ellipse cannot possibly tell you which one is intended.



            Returning to the first diagram, corresponding to the diagram you fave where the four known points are the vertices of a square... Symmetries force the center of the ellipse to be the center of the square, but that's not a very strong constraint.



            Mathematica graphics






            share|cite|improve this answer












            The equation $left(frac{x-h}{a}right)^2 + left( frac{y-k}{b}right)^2 = 1$ is the equation for an ellipse with major and minor axes parallel to the coordinate axes. We expect such ellipses to be unchanged under horizontal reflection and under vertical reflection through their axes. In this equation, these reflections are effected by $x mapsto 2h - x$ and $y mapsto 2k -y$.



            This means, if all you have is one point on the ellipse and the three reflected images of this point, you do not have $8$ independent coordinates; you have $2$ and uninformative reflections forced by the equation.



            We can see this by plotting two ellipses at the same center (same $h$ and $k$), intersecting at $4$ points, with, say, semiaxes of length $1$ and $2$.



            Mathematica graphics



            These clearly have four points of intersection. But as soon as you know an ellipse is centered at the origin and contains any one of the four points of intersection, by the major and minor axis reflection symmetries, it contains all four. This is still true if you use generic ellipses, which can be rotated.



            Mathematica graphics



            Remember that the reflections are through the major and minor axes, wherever they are.



            Of course, there are other ways for two ellipses to intersect at four points.



            Mathematica graphics



            Mathematica graphics



            So just knowing those four points are on an ellipse cannot possibly tell you which one is intended.



            Returning to the first diagram, corresponding to the diagram you fave where the four known points are the vertices of a square... Symmetries force the center of the ellipse to be the center of the square, but that's not a very strong constraint.



            Mathematica graphics







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 20 hours ago









            Eric Towers

            32k22266




            32k22266























                10














                This is exactly the question discussed several months ago here (Chinese). The central problem is the hidden constraints put on the ellipse.



                When you claim that ellipses are determined by the equation $frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$, you are implicitly assuming that there are no 'slant' ellipses. For instance, the equation $x^2+y^2+xy=1$ also characterize an ellipse, but it is not included in your equation.



                If by 'determine' you mean that the ellipse is the unique one passing through the points, the answer is 5. Since two ellipses can intersect at four points, these 4 points cannot determine a unique one. On the other hand, you can easily construct the unique quadratic curve passing through any 5 given point.



                However, you can, in fact, use only one point to specify an ellipse. Since the set of all ellipses $E$ is equipotent to $mathbb R^5$, as discussed above, and $mathbb R^5$ is equipotent with $mathbb R^2$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $mathbb R^2$ and $E$. You can see a formal discussion here.






                share|cite|improve this answer

















                • 8




                  your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                  – uhoh
                  13 hours ago








                • 3




                  @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                  – lastresort
                  12 hours ago










                • Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                  – Pieter Geerkens
                  4 hours ago
















                10














                This is exactly the question discussed several months ago here (Chinese). The central problem is the hidden constraints put on the ellipse.



                When you claim that ellipses are determined by the equation $frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$, you are implicitly assuming that there are no 'slant' ellipses. For instance, the equation $x^2+y^2+xy=1$ also characterize an ellipse, but it is not included in your equation.



                If by 'determine' you mean that the ellipse is the unique one passing through the points, the answer is 5. Since two ellipses can intersect at four points, these 4 points cannot determine a unique one. On the other hand, you can easily construct the unique quadratic curve passing through any 5 given point.



                However, you can, in fact, use only one point to specify an ellipse. Since the set of all ellipses $E$ is equipotent to $mathbb R^5$, as discussed above, and $mathbb R^5$ is equipotent with $mathbb R^2$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $mathbb R^2$ and $E$. You can see a formal discussion here.






                share|cite|improve this answer

















                • 8




                  your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                  – uhoh
                  13 hours ago








                • 3




                  @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                  – lastresort
                  12 hours ago










                • Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                  – Pieter Geerkens
                  4 hours ago














                10












                10








                10






                This is exactly the question discussed several months ago here (Chinese). The central problem is the hidden constraints put on the ellipse.



                When you claim that ellipses are determined by the equation $frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$, you are implicitly assuming that there are no 'slant' ellipses. For instance, the equation $x^2+y^2+xy=1$ also characterize an ellipse, but it is not included in your equation.



                If by 'determine' you mean that the ellipse is the unique one passing through the points, the answer is 5. Since two ellipses can intersect at four points, these 4 points cannot determine a unique one. On the other hand, you can easily construct the unique quadratic curve passing through any 5 given point.



                However, you can, in fact, use only one point to specify an ellipse. Since the set of all ellipses $E$ is equipotent to $mathbb R^5$, as discussed above, and $mathbb R^5$ is equipotent with $mathbb R^2$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $mathbb R^2$ and $E$. You can see a formal discussion here.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                This is exactly the question discussed several months ago here (Chinese). The central problem is the hidden constraints put on the ellipse.



                When you claim that ellipses are determined by the equation $frac{(x-h)^2}{a^2}+frac{(y-k)^2}{b^2}=1$, you are implicitly assuming that there are no 'slant' ellipses. For instance, the equation $x^2+y^2+xy=1$ also characterize an ellipse, but it is not included in your equation.



                If by 'determine' you mean that the ellipse is the unique one passing through the points, the answer is 5. Since two ellipses can intersect at four points, these 4 points cannot determine a unique one. On the other hand, you can easily construct the unique quadratic curve passing through any 5 given point.



                However, you can, in fact, use only one point to specify an ellipse. Since the set of all ellipses $E$ is equipotent to $mathbb R^5$, as discussed above, and $mathbb R^5$ is equipotent with $mathbb R^2$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $mathbb R^2$ and $E$. You can see a formal discussion here.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered yesterday









                Trebor

                76013




                76013








                • 8




                  your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                  – uhoh
                  13 hours ago








                • 3




                  @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                  – lastresort
                  12 hours ago










                • Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                  – Pieter Geerkens
                  4 hours ago














                • 8




                  your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                  – uhoh
                  13 hours ago








                • 3




                  @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                  – lastresort
                  12 hours ago










                • Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                  – Pieter Geerkens
                  4 hours ago








                8




                8




                your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                – uhoh
                13 hours ago






                your link returns to me the most frightening 404 message I've ever seen i.stack.imgur.com/K8HL1.png though google translate may have had something to do with it.
                – uhoh
                13 hours ago






                3




                3




                @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                – lastresort
                12 hours ago




                @uhoh The link is broken for me too. Yes it's google translate on your end, and it's a pretty accurate translation (although I would render it as "... where no knowledge exists").
                – lastresort
                12 hours ago












                Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                – Pieter Geerkens
                4 hours ago




                Is that correspondence establishing the equipotency of R5 with R2 either unique or canonical? If not, then one needs the specific correspondence in addition to the single point.
                – Pieter Geerkens
                4 hours ago











                6















                " I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows: $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ "




                This is not correct. The above equation defines not all the ellipses, but only the ellipses with axis parallel to the (Ox,Oy) axis.



                The general equation of ellipses is basically the general equation of quadratic curves (with constraints below) :
                $$ax^2+2bxy+cy^2+2dx+2fy+g=0$$
                where $a,b,c,d,f,g$ are constants.
                To distinguish ellipses from hyperbolas, circles and others degenerate formes also defined by the above general equation, the constrains are :
                $$Delta=begin{vmatrix}
                a & b & d \
                b & c & f \
                d & f & g
                end{vmatrix}neq 0quad;quad
                begin{vmatrix}
                a & b \
                c & d
                end{vmatrix}>0quad;quad
                frac{Delta}{a+c}<0quadtext{and}quad aneq c.$$

                They are 5 independent parameters in the above general equation. Thus five points are necessary to define a unique quadratic curve.



                Of course, given five arbitrary points doesn't guaranty that the curve will be an ellipse. One have to check that the above constrains are satisfied.



                NOTE : A more intuitive way to understand why five points are necessary, consider the equation $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ and rotate the (Ox,Oy) in order to avoid to forget the "inclined" ellipses. One more parameter is necessary (the angle of rotation). Thus, five parameters in total.






                share|cite|improve this answer




























                  6















                  " I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows: $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ "




                  This is not correct. The above equation defines not all the ellipses, but only the ellipses with axis parallel to the (Ox,Oy) axis.



                  The general equation of ellipses is basically the general equation of quadratic curves (with constraints below) :
                  $$ax^2+2bxy+cy^2+2dx+2fy+g=0$$
                  where $a,b,c,d,f,g$ are constants.
                  To distinguish ellipses from hyperbolas, circles and others degenerate formes also defined by the above general equation, the constrains are :
                  $$Delta=begin{vmatrix}
                  a & b & d \
                  b & c & f \
                  d & f & g
                  end{vmatrix}neq 0quad;quad
                  begin{vmatrix}
                  a & b \
                  c & d
                  end{vmatrix}>0quad;quad
                  frac{Delta}{a+c}<0quadtext{and}quad aneq c.$$

                  They are 5 independent parameters in the above general equation. Thus five points are necessary to define a unique quadratic curve.



                  Of course, given five arbitrary points doesn't guaranty that the curve will be an ellipse. One have to check that the above constrains are satisfied.



                  NOTE : A more intuitive way to understand why five points are necessary, consider the equation $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ and rotate the (Ox,Oy) in order to avoid to forget the "inclined" ellipses. One more parameter is necessary (the angle of rotation). Thus, five parameters in total.






                  share|cite|improve this answer


























                    6












                    6








                    6







                    " I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows: $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ "




                    This is not correct. The above equation defines not all the ellipses, but only the ellipses with axis parallel to the (Ox,Oy) axis.



                    The general equation of ellipses is basically the general equation of quadratic curves (with constraints below) :
                    $$ax^2+2bxy+cy^2+2dx+2fy+g=0$$
                    where $a,b,c,d,f,g$ are constants.
                    To distinguish ellipses from hyperbolas, circles and others degenerate formes also defined by the above general equation, the constrains are :
                    $$Delta=begin{vmatrix}
                    a & b & d \
                    b & c & f \
                    d & f & g
                    end{vmatrix}neq 0quad;quad
                    begin{vmatrix}
                    a & b \
                    c & d
                    end{vmatrix}>0quad;quad
                    frac{Delta}{a+c}<0quadtext{and}quad aneq c.$$

                    They are 5 independent parameters in the above general equation. Thus five points are necessary to define a unique quadratic curve.



                    Of course, given five arbitrary points doesn't guaranty that the curve will be an ellipse. One have to check that the above constrains are satisfied.



                    NOTE : A more intuitive way to understand why five points are necessary, consider the equation $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ and rotate the (Ox,Oy) in order to avoid to forget the "inclined" ellipses. One more parameter is necessary (the angle of rotation). Thus, five parameters in total.






                    share|cite|improve this answer















                    " I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows: $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ "




                    This is not correct. The above equation defines not all the ellipses, but only the ellipses with axis parallel to the (Ox,Oy) axis.



                    The general equation of ellipses is basically the general equation of quadratic curves (with constraints below) :
                    $$ax^2+2bxy+cy^2+2dx+2fy+g=0$$
                    where $a,b,c,d,f,g$ are constants.
                    To distinguish ellipses from hyperbolas, circles and others degenerate formes also defined by the above general equation, the constrains are :
                    $$Delta=begin{vmatrix}
                    a & b & d \
                    b & c & f \
                    d & f & g
                    end{vmatrix}neq 0quad;quad
                    begin{vmatrix}
                    a & b \
                    c & d
                    end{vmatrix}>0quad;quad
                    frac{Delta}{a+c}<0quadtext{and}quad aneq c.$$

                    They are 5 independent parameters in the above general equation. Thus five points are necessary to define a unique quadratic curve.



                    Of course, given five arbitrary points doesn't guaranty that the curve will be an ellipse. One have to check that the above constrains are satisfied.



                    NOTE : A more intuitive way to understand why five points are necessary, consider the equation $(frac{x-h}{a})^2 + (frac{y-k}{b})^2 = 1$ and rotate the (Ox,Oy) in order to avoid to forget the "inclined" ellipses. One more parameter is necessary (the angle of rotation). Thus, five parameters in total.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited 3 hours ago

























                    answered yesterday









                    JJacquelin

                    42.8k21750




                    42.8k21750























                        1














                        Consider a subset of the set of ellipses passing through the $4$ red points, that contains ellipses that pass through the points and are centred at $(0,0)$ with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. The general equation of an ellipse belonging to this subset is $$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$ Since the $4$ points lie on the ellipse, plug them into its equation. Notice that plugging any point generates the same equation, $$4/a^2+4/b^2=1$$ You have two unknowns $a,b$ and only one equation. This means there are infinitely many ordered pairs $(a,b)$ that satisfy the condition, hence the subset is infinite, which in turn implies the set of ellipses that pass through the given points is infinite.






                        share|cite|improve this answer





















                        • Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday










                        • So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday






                        • 2




                          There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday


















                        1














                        Consider a subset of the set of ellipses passing through the $4$ red points, that contains ellipses that pass through the points and are centred at $(0,0)$ with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. The general equation of an ellipse belonging to this subset is $$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$ Since the $4$ points lie on the ellipse, plug them into its equation. Notice that plugging any point generates the same equation, $$4/a^2+4/b^2=1$$ You have two unknowns $a,b$ and only one equation. This means there are infinitely many ordered pairs $(a,b)$ that satisfy the condition, hence the subset is infinite, which in turn implies the set of ellipses that pass through the given points is infinite.






                        share|cite|improve this answer





















                        • Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday










                        • So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday






                        • 2




                          There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday
















                        1












                        1








                        1






                        Consider a subset of the set of ellipses passing through the $4$ red points, that contains ellipses that pass through the points and are centred at $(0,0)$ with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. The general equation of an ellipse belonging to this subset is $$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$ Since the $4$ points lie on the ellipse, plug them into its equation. Notice that plugging any point generates the same equation, $$4/a^2+4/b^2=1$$ You have two unknowns $a,b$ and only one equation. This means there are infinitely many ordered pairs $(a,b)$ that satisfy the condition, hence the subset is infinite, which in turn implies the set of ellipses that pass through the given points is infinite.






                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        Consider a subset of the set of ellipses passing through the $4$ red points, that contains ellipses that pass through the points and are centred at $(0,0)$ with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. The general equation of an ellipse belonging to this subset is $$frac{x^2}{a^2}+frac{y^2}{b^2}=1$$ Since the $4$ points lie on the ellipse, plug them into its equation. Notice that plugging any point generates the same equation, $$4/a^2+4/b^2=1$$ You have two unknowns $a,b$ and only one equation. This means there are infinitely many ordered pairs $(a,b)$ that satisfy the condition, hence the subset is infinite, which in turn implies the set of ellipses that pass through the given points is infinite.







                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        share|cite|improve this answer



                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        answered yesterday









                        Shubham Johri

                        4,264717




                        4,264717












                        • Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday










                        • So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday






                        • 2




                          There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday




















                        • Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday










                        • So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                          – S.Cramer
                          yesterday






                        • 1




                          Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday






                        • 2




                          There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                          – Shubham Johri
                          yesterday


















                        Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                        – S.Cramer
                        yesterday




                        Doesnt this only occur because all the points have the same value when squared (i.e. 2^2 and (-2)^2. What if they didnt have the same value and were scattered around the place.
                        – S.Cramer
                        yesterday




                        1




                        1




                        Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday




                        Yes, it is because they have the same value on squaring. This, and also because you don't seem to be aware of the general equation of an ellipse in the $xy$ plane whose axes of symmetry are not necessarily parallel to the co-ordinate axes, is the reason I chose this specific subset.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday












                        So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                        – S.Cramer
                        yesterday




                        So, just for clarification, if these 4 points were not symmetrically arranged, 4 would be enough (in the subset where the ellipse is axes are parallel to the coordinate axes and centered at zero).
                        – S.Cramer
                        yesterday




                        1




                        1




                        Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday




                        Yes, a single point can be used to infer three more points for an ellipse centred at $(0,0)$ and with axes parallel to the coordinate axes. If your point is $(a,b)$, then the other three points are $(a,-b),(-a,b)(-a,-b)$.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday




                        2




                        2




                        There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday






                        There is no such thing as linearly dependent/independent points. What you are trying to say is that the equations you obtained from the four points are all the same, hence linearly dependent. As an example, consider the three equations:$$2x+y=1\x+2y=3\3x+3y=4$$From the looks of it, you have $3$ equations in $2$ unknowns $x,y$. But careful examination reveals that the third equation is really only the sum of the first two, and is thus of 'no use'.$$E_3=E_1+E_2$$Since $E_3$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $E_1,E_2$, we say that the equations are 'linearly' dependent.
                        – Shubham Johri
                        yesterday













                        1














                        Let me try:



                        An ellipse is defined as the locus of a



                        point $P$ s.t. the sum of distances of P to



                        2 fixed points $F_1$ and $F_2$ is constant, i.e.



                        $D_P:= d(P,F_1) +d(P,F_2) = c$.



                        Hence with $F(x_1,y_1),F(x_2,y_2)$, and $c,$ we have $5$ parameters to determine an ellipse.



                        Note : $D_P > d(F_1,F_2)$ (Why?)






                        share|cite|improve this answer




























                          1














                          Let me try:



                          An ellipse is defined as the locus of a



                          point $P$ s.t. the sum of distances of P to



                          2 fixed points $F_1$ and $F_2$ is constant, i.e.



                          $D_P:= d(P,F_1) +d(P,F_2) = c$.



                          Hence with $F(x_1,y_1),F(x_2,y_2)$, and $c,$ we have $5$ parameters to determine an ellipse.



                          Note : $D_P > d(F_1,F_2)$ (Why?)






                          share|cite|improve this answer


























                            1












                            1








                            1






                            Let me try:



                            An ellipse is defined as the locus of a



                            point $P$ s.t. the sum of distances of P to



                            2 fixed points $F_1$ and $F_2$ is constant, i.e.



                            $D_P:= d(P,F_1) +d(P,F_2) = c$.



                            Hence with $F(x_1,y_1),F(x_2,y_2)$, and $c,$ we have $5$ parameters to determine an ellipse.



                            Note : $D_P > d(F_1,F_2)$ (Why?)






                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            Let me try:



                            An ellipse is defined as the locus of a



                            point $P$ s.t. the sum of distances of P to



                            2 fixed points $F_1$ and $F_2$ is constant, i.e.



                            $D_P:= d(P,F_1) +d(P,F_2) = c$.



                            Hence with $F(x_1,y_1),F(x_2,y_2)$, and $c,$ we have $5$ parameters to determine an ellipse.



                            Note : $D_P > d(F_1,F_2)$ (Why?)







                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer








                            edited yesterday

























                            answered yesterday









                            Peter Szilas

                            10.8k2720




                            10.8k2720






























                                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.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • 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.


                                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%2f3063610%2fhow-many-points-are-needed-to-uniquely-define-an-ellipse%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

                                An IMO inspired problem

                                Management

                                Investment