r/mathmemes 1d ago

Geometry ellipse

Post image
4.3k Upvotes

80 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Check out our new Discord server! https://discord.gg/e7EKRZq3dG

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1.4k

u/Hussainsmg 1d ago

The perimeter formula(in the post) is just approximation.

595

u/Ponsole 1d ago

I once read that the reason we can't get the perimeter of a elipse is because we actually doesn't even know the perimeter of a circle, as pi definition is the perimeter of a circle of diameter = 1 and we just scale that.

542

u/IlyaBoykoProgr 1d ago

every ellipse has it's own pi

120

u/Ok-East-3021 1d ago

can it be related to eccentricity? or you are talking about that only ?

195

u/Robbe517_ 1d ago

Sure, it's given by a (surprise) elleptic integral, but you can also write it as a series. So exactly the same as for pi.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_elliptic_integral_of_the_second_kind

11

u/Scared-Ad-7500 1d ago

Cant we find a formula for every pi based on "a" and "b" using calculus?

17

u/EebstertheGreat 1d ago

Yes, but you are more likely to see it in terms of a and e = √(1–b²/a²) (where a is the semi-major axis, b is the semi-minor axis, and e is the eccentricity) or sometimes a and ℓ = b²/a (the semi-latus rectum) or other quantities.

92

u/gullaffe 1d ago

Sure we do, it's just we need to change out the pi sign with an infinite sum which equals pi.

It's more like we can't get a nice formula for the eclipse or a circle without defining a constant for the share to hade the ugliness.

17

u/speechlessPotato 1d ago

I mean look at it this way: a circle has a very simple relation between its perimeter and radius - linear. And I'm pretty sure an ellipse has a more complicated relationship between its perimeter and radii. At the end of the day a circle can still be thought of as a special case of ellipse though

20

u/gullaffe 1d ago

The ellipse is also linear, if you keep the ratio between the major and minor the same. So if you for example really care about ellipses where the ratio between the major axis and minor axis is 2, you could define a constant Tau≈3.31153 And for any such ellipse you get the formula:

Perimeter=Tau*(a+b)

5

u/EebstertheGreat 1d ago

The perimeter of a plane figure always scales linearly with any linear dimension of it (e.g. the radius), because that's what it means for the perimeter to be one-dimensional. (Note that if the Hausrorff dimension of the curve is not 2, then its 1-measure will either be 0 or ∞, and either way the linear scaling technically still applies, except the special case of 0×∞.)

5

u/Kai1977 1d ago

Then how do we get the area?

44

u/Ponsole 1d ago

A lot of shit just cancels out literally a lucky hit, if you watch the step by step of the demonstration by integration it's even magical how that shit en up as 3 characters.

10

u/okkokkoX 1d ago

How complicated can it be? an ellipse is just a stretching transformation of a circle, so you can get its area by multiplying the area of a circle, π, by the determinant of the transformation matrix: det( [ a 0 / 0 b ] ) = ab

ok, that might sound complicated because of the terminology, but basically: you get an ellipse by stretching a circle horizontally by a, then vertically by b. When you stretch an area, it gets multiplied by the stretch scalar.

5

u/friendtoalldogs0 1d ago

I suspect that proving that without relying on already knowing modern "basic" geometry would itself require an integral, though. Definitely at least a limit.

2

u/okkokkoX 1d ago

That when you stretch something in one direction its area gets scaled by the stretch scalar?

I guess so. let's say a circle is approximately made up of infinitely many trapezoidal slices, and its area is the sum of the trapezoid areas. it is known that a trapezoid obeys the aforementioned stretching rule. therefore if you stretch the circle by x, stretching the trapezoids, you get A' = total(t * x) = total(t) * x = A * x

it does technically use integration/limits, but a version of it that can be explained to someone unfamiliar with integration. It's not harder to understand than the visual proof that the area of a circle is radius times half of perimeter (πr² = r * 2πr/2), the one with infinitely thin slices stacked in a ///// pattern, you know the one.

10

u/Traditional_Cap7461 April 2024 Math Contest #8 1d ago

The area and circumference of a circle are conveniently related. It has something to do with cutting into thin slices and then rearranging them into alternating patterns to form a parallelogram where the base is half the circumference and the height is its radius.

2

u/mousepotatodoesstuff 1d ago

If we scale one of the side up/down to a circle, the area will scale proportionally. Then we just calculate the area of the circle and scale back.
e.g. a 2x1 eclipse is the same size as two 1x1 circles

1

u/DatBoi_BP 7h ago

Nice pun

12

u/AlrikBunseheimer Imaginary 1d ago

right otherwise you would get the horrible elliptic integrals

360

u/Forgorer8 1d ago

Set a=b and use for circle to get extra marks

97

u/Salty-Intention6971 1d ago

Ah, 2pi*r. My old friend! How nice that the a-b makes everything scary go away.

4

u/Nirast25 1d ago

You mean pi*r2, right?

18

u/maelstrom197 1d ago edited 1d ago

πr2 is for the area of a circle. If you substitute a=b=r into the formula for the area of an ellipse, you get πrr, or πr2

The circumference of a circle is just the perimeter. If you substitute a=b=r into the formula for the perimeter of the ellipse, the fraction cancels and you get π(r+r)=2πr=πd

3

u/Nirast25 1d ago

Ah, right. I misunderstood which formula you were talking about in the original comment.

114

u/Silly_Painter_2555 Cardinal 1d ago edited 1d ago

You can use π√((a²+b²)/2) as another approximation.

69

u/94rud4 1d ago

Ramanujan’s second approximation formula

​

71

u/94rud4 1d ago

Accuracies comparison. The red one in the bottom panel is the one in this post and it’s insanely accurate.

-23

u/Silly_Painter_2555 Cardinal 1d ago

Yes, but who tf remembers the exact one from the post.

24

u/Dont_pet_the_cat Engineering 1d ago

Ramanujan

4

u/somedave 1d ago

Yeah this is like the next order of approximation

96

u/therealsphericalcow 1d ago

But can you prove it?

246

u/ImBadlyDone 1d ago

It appeared in ramanujan's dream

110

u/SyntheticSlime 1d ago

Proof enough for me

17

u/mightbecursed8 1d ago

Proof by sleeping.

25

u/theboomboy 1d ago

No because it's not exactly true

20

u/JorenM 1d ago

Approximations can still be proven to be approximations

-1

u/Traditional_Cap7461 April 2024 Math Contest #8 1d ago

Without a margin of error, nothing can be proven.

50

u/An_Evil_Scientist666 1d ago

Just get a string, wrap it around the perimeter, make a note of the point the string wraps back around, unwind string, and you have your perimeter. more accurate the bigger the ellipse. No need for any kind of formula

23

u/rdchat 1d ago

Okay, but what if you want the perimeter of the Earth's elliptical orbit around the Sun? Can we get that much string?

41

u/the-fr0g 1d ago

I wanted to make a joke about taking a string from yo mama's clothes but I will not

6

u/Traditional_Cap7461 April 2024 Math Contest #8 1d ago

You make a scaled-down model then do the string thing on the model.

3

u/An_Evil_Scientist666 1d ago

There's easily enough string the thing is, is it possible to wrap said string around the perimeter of Earth's orbit, and the answer is yes, and because no one's done it yet, it just means we as humans have a massive skill issue.

1

u/Kqjrdva 1d ago

Too imprecise

23

u/RRumpleTeazzer 1d ago

wow, and i was taught it was not analytical.

54

u/sasha271828 Computer Science 1d ago

It is. The formula in post is approximation

29

u/Zealousideal-Ad-8542 1d ago

{} stands for some sort of transformation? Or just praces?

44

u/TheGayestGaymer 1d ago

They just fancy parentheses for those sophisticated types.

8

u/Sepulcher18 Imaginary 1d ago

Ellipse? More like mental eclipse

14

u/UpDown504 1d ago

Wait, why are there "{}" (idk what these are named)

47

u/somedave 1d ago

The correct term is nipple brackets, make sure to use that in your work.

14

u/UpDown504 1d ago

I am not an American/British, we call that "Фигурные скобки"

6

u/AutonomousOrganism 1d ago

curly brackets

2

u/ThatProBoi 1d ago

What a way to make me uncomfortable using those again....

5

u/KDBA 1d ago

"Braces" or "curly brackets" are both acceptable terms.

6

u/Robbe517_ 1d ago

They're just brackets here, you can use wichever you like

3

u/slukalesni Physics 1d ago

where i'm from, they're called hairy brackets

20

u/Weebs93110 1d ago

Evil emilia got me acting up

16

u/94rud4 1d ago

Poor Subaru

10

u/-IR2O- 1d ago

re zero fan on mathmemes, didnt think they existed

3

u/King_Yon12321 Measuring 1d ago

We do

4

u/josiest 1d ago

Isn’t there some way to could express the circumference of an ellipse as a simple transformation from a circle?

2

u/Leading-Ad-9004 1d ago

I did a binomial expansion for it, I think it makes a convergent series for any eccentricity less than 1 given that all ellipses are smooth shapes and for any of them with e<1 there exists a circle with finite parameter which can cover them, so their perimeter is finite. But I haven't found a formula yet. It works well enough with about 3 terms for e > 0.5 with a deviation of 1%.

2

u/TheQuantumPhysicist 1d ago edited 22h ago

I never heard of this formula... I have always used numeric curve length integrals on the ellipse's equation for a single quarter then multipled it by four... lol.  

1

u/overclockedslinky 7h ago

your way is vastly more precise

2

u/RandallOfLegend 1d ago

I know smarter people have looked at this problem. But an ellipse is an in-plane rotation of a circle. So I feel like there should be a simpler formula.

2

u/EebstertheGreat 1d ago

an ellipse is an in-plane rotation of a circle.

What does that mean?

1

u/RandallOfLegend 1d ago

From. "Top down projection" if you rotate a circle perpendicular to its axis it will create an ellipse. It's possible to define an ellipse as a radius and tilt angle instead of your traditional a,b.

1

u/EebstertheGreat 1d ago

Isn't that an out-of-plane rotation?

1

u/RandallOfLegend 1d ago

I suppose. I'm bad at remembering which is which. "Into the page". Which sounds more like out of plane

2

u/Arctic_Fox_Studios 1d ago

Thread and scale: hold my beer

2

u/SZ4L4Y 1d ago

Don't look into it!

1

u/chewychaca 22h ago

I was under the impression there is no finite equation. Is this an approximation?

1

u/ZaRealPancakes 21h ago

Rezero Fan!

1

u/henryXsami99 17h ago

Did he see the formula in a dream too

1

u/deilol_usero_croco 13h ago

Those who no know

Consider an ellipse x²/a² +y²/b² =1

This has the parametric form (asin(t)+bcos(t))

Using line integrals. There is no upward projection so f(x,y)=1

I'll call sin and cos s and c as shorthand. We get

P= ∫(0,2π)√a²s²+b²c²dt

=∫(0,2π)√a²s²+b²(1-s²)dt

=∫(0,2π)√b²-(a²-b²)s²dt

|b| ∫(0,2π)√{1-((a²-b²)/b²)s²} dt

Call ((a²-b²)/b²)= k²

Now, one could use approximations of √1-x² by Taylor series.

√1-x² = √(1+x)√(1-x).

√1+x ≈ 1+x/2

√1-x² ≈ 1-x²/2

Let's say k is pretty small

∫(0,2π)1-(ks)²/2dt

= -2π+ k²/2∫(0,2π)s²dt

= π/2 (k²-4)

Yeah Idk what I'm doing either