Find a parabola touches the line $y=x$ and $y=-x$ at $A(3,3)$ and $B(1,-1)$











up vote
0
down vote

favorite
3













If a parabola touches the line $y=x$ and $y=-x$ at $A(3,3)$ and $B(1,-1)$, then find the focus, axis of the parabola and its directrix.




What I thought: Since the 2 tangents are perpendicular,the origin must lie on the directrix and the line joining A and B is a focal chord. Don't know how to proceed from here..










share|cite|improve this question
























  • perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
    – maveric
    yesterday












  • the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
    – Gesskay
    yesterday










  • This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
    – Nosrati
    yesterday










  • @Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
    – maveric
    yesterday















up vote
0
down vote

favorite
3













If a parabola touches the line $y=x$ and $y=-x$ at $A(3,3)$ and $B(1,-1)$, then find the focus, axis of the parabola and its directrix.




What I thought: Since the 2 tangents are perpendicular,the origin must lie on the directrix and the line joining A and B is a focal chord. Don't know how to proceed from here..










share|cite|improve this question
























  • perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
    – maveric
    yesterday












  • the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
    – Gesskay
    yesterday










  • This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
    – Nosrati
    yesterday










  • @Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
    – maveric
    yesterday













up vote
0
down vote

favorite
3









up vote
0
down vote

favorite
3






3






If a parabola touches the line $y=x$ and $y=-x$ at $A(3,3)$ and $B(1,-1)$, then find the focus, axis of the parabola and its directrix.




What I thought: Since the 2 tangents are perpendicular,the origin must lie on the directrix and the line joining A and B is a focal chord. Don't know how to proceed from here..










share|cite|improve this question
















If a parabola touches the line $y=x$ and $y=-x$ at $A(3,3)$ and $B(1,-1)$, then find the focus, axis of the parabola and its directrix.




What I thought: Since the 2 tangents are perpendicular,the origin must lie on the directrix and the line joining A and B is a focal chord. Don't know how to proceed from here..







conic-sections






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









Nosrati

25.6k62252




25.6k62252










asked yesterday









Gesskay

32




32












  • perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
    – maveric
    yesterday












  • the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
    – Gesskay
    yesterday










  • This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
    – Nosrati
    yesterday










  • @Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
    – maveric
    yesterday


















  • perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
    – maveric
    yesterday












  • the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
    – Gesskay
    yesterday










  • This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
    – Nosrati
    yesterday










  • @Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
    – maveric
    yesterday
















perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
– maveric
yesterday






perpedicular to focal chord a line passing through origin will become axis of parabola. perpedicular distance from origin to focal chord will be one fourth of semi latus ractum
– maveric
yesterday














the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
– Gesskay
yesterday




the tangents intersect at the directrix not the vertex of the parabola.What you say is true if the origin is the vertex but actually it is the directix where they intersect
– Gesskay
yesterday












This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
– Nosrati
yesterday




This parabola inclined respect to $x$-axis, so perhaps considering general form $Ax^2+By^2+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F=0$ be helpful here!
– Nosrati
yesterday












@Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
– maveric
yesterday




@Gesskay. yes it should be 1/2 of latus ractum.
– maveric
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote



accepted










The most general form of a parabola is $$Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$
where $$B^2 = 4AC tag{1}$$.



Letting $(x,y)=(3,3)$, we get $$9A + 9B + 9C + 3D + 3E + F = 0 tag{2}$$



Letting $(x,y)=(1, -1)$, we get $$A - B + C + D - E + F = 0 tag{3}$$



begin{align}
Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0
&implies 2Ax + By + Bxy' + 2Cyy' + D + Ey' = 0 \
&implies (Bx + 2Cy + E)y' + (2Ax + By + D) = 0
end{align}



Letting $(x,y,y') = (3,3,1)$, we get $(3B + 6C + E) + (6A + 3B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$6A + 6B + 6C + D + E = 0 tag{4}$$



Letting $(x,y,y') = (1,-1,-1)$, we get $-(B - 2C + E) + (2A - B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$2A - 2B + 2C + D - E = 0tag{5}$$



Solving equations $(1)$ through $(5)$ and letting $A=1$, we get



$$(A,B,C,D,E,F) = (1, -4, 4, -12, 6, 9)$$



So, the equation of the parabola becomes



$$x^2 - 4xy + 4y^2 - 12x + 6y + 9 = 0$$



Added because of something that I found out later.



If $A=0$, then $B^2=4AC$ implies $B=0$ and the equation becomes $Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$.



If $A ne 0$, then $A < 0$ implies
$$(-A)x^2 +(-B)xy + (-C)y^2 + (-D)x + (-E)y + (-F) = 0$$
and $B^2=4AC iff (-B)^2 = 4(-A)(-C)$



So we may as well assume that $A = a^2 > 0$. Then



begin{align}
Ax^2 + Bxy + Cy^2
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(4Ax^2 + 4ABxy + B^2y^2) \
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(2Ax+By)^2 \
&= (ax+by)^2 \
end{align}



where $b = dfrac{B}{2a}$.



So we can write the most general form of a parabola as $$(ax + by)^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$



We can now argue much as I did above and get the same answer without being annoyed by the nonlinear equation $B^2 = 4AC$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
    – amd
    yesterday












  • @amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
    – steven gregory
    21 hours ago










  • That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
    – amd
    20 hours ago












  • @amd OK, how's this?
    – steven gregory
    13 hours ago










  • I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago


















up vote
1
down vote













Let’s continue with the geometric construction that you started.



enter image description here



Construct the parallelogram $AOBC$. The diagonal $OC$ is parallel to the parabola’s axis. We know that perpendicular tangents meet on the directrix, which is perpendicular to the parabola’s axis, so we now know its directrix $d$. Construct circles centered on $A$ and $B$ and tangent to $d$. Their intersection is the parabola’s focus. You can simply divide $overline{AB}$ proportionally to find this point: $F = {r_BA+r_ABover r_B+r_A}$. You can then use the point-point and point-line distance formulas to obtain a Cartesian equation for the parabola.



The construction in the preceding paragraph took advantage of the perpendicularity of the two tangents, but it’s quite easy to obtain a Cartesian equation of a parabola from any pair of points $P_0$ and $P_2$ on it and the tangents at those points: Let $P_1$ be the intersection of the tangents. A Bézier parameterization of the parabola is then $(1-t)^2P_0+2t(1-t)P_1+t^2P_2$. Eliminating $t$ gets you a Cartesian equation for it. In this case, the tangents intersect at the origin, so we have the parameterization $$x = 3(1-t)^2+t^2 = 4t^2-6t+3 \ y=3(1-t)^2-t^2 = 2t^2-6t+3.$$ Eliminating $t$ produces the equation $$x^2-4xy+4y^2-12x+6y+9=0.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
    – steven gregory
    yesterday










  • @stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
    – amd
    yesterday










  • @amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago











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',
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%2f2999165%2ffind-a-parabola-touches-the-line-y-x-and-y-x-at-a3-3-and-b1-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
0
down vote



accepted










The most general form of a parabola is $$Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$
where $$B^2 = 4AC tag{1}$$.



Letting $(x,y)=(3,3)$, we get $$9A + 9B + 9C + 3D + 3E + F = 0 tag{2}$$



Letting $(x,y)=(1, -1)$, we get $$A - B + C + D - E + F = 0 tag{3}$$



begin{align}
Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0
&implies 2Ax + By + Bxy' + 2Cyy' + D + Ey' = 0 \
&implies (Bx + 2Cy + E)y' + (2Ax + By + D) = 0
end{align}



Letting $(x,y,y') = (3,3,1)$, we get $(3B + 6C + E) + (6A + 3B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$6A + 6B + 6C + D + E = 0 tag{4}$$



Letting $(x,y,y') = (1,-1,-1)$, we get $-(B - 2C + E) + (2A - B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$2A - 2B + 2C + D - E = 0tag{5}$$



Solving equations $(1)$ through $(5)$ and letting $A=1$, we get



$$(A,B,C,D,E,F) = (1, -4, 4, -12, 6, 9)$$



So, the equation of the parabola becomes



$$x^2 - 4xy + 4y^2 - 12x + 6y + 9 = 0$$



Added because of something that I found out later.



If $A=0$, then $B^2=4AC$ implies $B=0$ and the equation becomes $Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$.



If $A ne 0$, then $A < 0$ implies
$$(-A)x^2 +(-B)xy + (-C)y^2 + (-D)x + (-E)y + (-F) = 0$$
and $B^2=4AC iff (-B)^2 = 4(-A)(-C)$



So we may as well assume that $A = a^2 > 0$. Then



begin{align}
Ax^2 + Bxy + Cy^2
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(4Ax^2 + 4ABxy + B^2y^2) \
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(2Ax+By)^2 \
&= (ax+by)^2 \
end{align}



where $b = dfrac{B}{2a}$.



So we can write the most general form of a parabola as $$(ax + by)^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$



We can now argue much as I did above and get the same answer without being annoyed by the nonlinear equation $B^2 = 4AC$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
    – amd
    yesterday












  • @amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
    – steven gregory
    21 hours ago










  • That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
    – amd
    20 hours ago












  • @amd OK, how's this?
    – steven gregory
    13 hours ago










  • I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago















up vote
0
down vote



accepted










The most general form of a parabola is $$Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$
where $$B^2 = 4AC tag{1}$$.



Letting $(x,y)=(3,3)$, we get $$9A + 9B + 9C + 3D + 3E + F = 0 tag{2}$$



Letting $(x,y)=(1, -1)$, we get $$A - B + C + D - E + F = 0 tag{3}$$



begin{align}
Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0
&implies 2Ax + By + Bxy' + 2Cyy' + D + Ey' = 0 \
&implies (Bx + 2Cy + E)y' + (2Ax + By + D) = 0
end{align}



Letting $(x,y,y') = (3,3,1)$, we get $(3B + 6C + E) + (6A + 3B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$6A + 6B + 6C + D + E = 0 tag{4}$$



Letting $(x,y,y') = (1,-1,-1)$, we get $-(B - 2C + E) + (2A - B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$2A - 2B + 2C + D - E = 0tag{5}$$



Solving equations $(1)$ through $(5)$ and letting $A=1$, we get



$$(A,B,C,D,E,F) = (1, -4, 4, -12, 6, 9)$$



So, the equation of the parabola becomes



$$x^2 - 4xy + 4y^2 - 12x + 6y + 9 = 0$$



Added because of something that I found out later.



If $A=0$, then $B^2=4AC$ implies $B=0$ and the equation becomes $Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$.



If $A ne 0$, then $A < 0$ implies
$$(-A)x^2 +(-B)xy + (-C)y^2 + (-D)x + (-E)y + (-F) = 0$$
and $B^2=4AC iff (-B)^2 = 4(-A)(-C)$



So we may as well assume that $A = a^2 > 0$. Then



begin{align}
Ax^2 + Bxy + Cy^2
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(4Ax^2 + 4ABxy + B^2y^2) \
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(2Ax+By)^2 \
&= (ax+by)^2 \
end{align}



where $b = dfrac{B}{2a}$.



So we can write the most general form of a parabola as $$(ax + by)^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$



We can now argue much as I did above and get the same answer without being annoyed by the nonlinear equation $B^2 = 4AC$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
    – amd
    yesterday












  • @amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
    – steven gregory
    21 hours ago










  • That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
    – amd
    20 hours ago












  • @amd OK, how's this?
    – steven gregory
    13 hours ago










  • I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago













up vote
0
down vote



accepted







up vote
0
down vote



accepted






The most general form of a parabola is $$Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$
where $$B^2 = 4AC tag{1}$$.



Letting $(x,y)=(3,3)$, we get $$9A + 9B + 9C + 3D + 3E + F = 0 tag{2}$$



Letting $(x,y)=(1, -1)$, we get $$A - B + C + D - E + F = 0 tag{3}$$



begin{align}
Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0
&implies 2Ax + By + Bxy' + 2Cyy' + D + Ey' = 0 \
&implies (Bx + 2Cy + E)y' + (2Ax + By + D) = 0
end{align}



Letting $(x,y,y') = (3,3,1)$, we get $(3B + 6C + E) + (6A + 3B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$6A + 6B + 6C + D + E = 0 tag{4}$$



Letting $(x,y,y') = (1,-1,-1)$, we get $-(B - 2C + E) + (2A - B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$2A - 2B + 2C + D - E = 0tag{5}$$



Solving equations $(1)$ through $(5)$ and letting $A=1$, we get



$$(A,B,C,D,E,F) = (1, -4, 4, -12, 6, 9)$$



So, the equation of the parabola becomes



$$x^2 - 4xy + 4y^2 - 12x + 6y + 9 = 0$$



Added because of something that I found out later.



If $A=0$, then $B^2=4AC$ implies $B=0$ and the equation becomes $Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$.



If $A ne 0$, then $A < 0$ implies
$$(-A)x^2 +(-B)xy + (-C)y^2 + (-D)x + (-E)y + (-F) = 0$$
and $B^2=4AC iff (-B)^2 = 4(-A)(-C)$



So we may as well assume that $A = a^2 > 0$. Then



begin{align}
Ax^2 + Bxy + Cy^2
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(4Ax^2 + 4ABxy + B^2y^2) \
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(2Ax+By)^2 \
&= (ax+by)^2 \
end{align}



where $b = dfrac{B}{2a}$.



So we can write the most general form of a parabola as $$(ax + by)^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$



We can now argue much as I did above and get the same answer without being annoyed by the nonlinear equation $B^2 = 4AC$.






share|cite|improve this answer














The most general form of a parabola is $$Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$
where $$B^2 = 4AC tag{1}$$.



Letting $(x,y)=(3,3)$, we get $$9A + 9B + 9C + 3D + 3E + F = 0 tag{2}$$



Letting $(x,y)=(1, -1)$, we get $$A - B + C + D - E + F = 0 tag{3}$$



begin{align}
Ax^2+Bxy + Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0
&implies 2Ax + By + Bxy' + 2Cyy' + D + Ey' = 0 \
&implies (Bx + 2Cy + E)y' + (2Ax + By + D) = 0
end{align}



Letting $(x,y,y') = (3,3,1)$, we get $(3B + 6C + E) + (6A + 3B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$6A + 6B + 6C + D + E = 0 tag{4}$$



Letting $(x,y,y') = (1,-1,-1)$, we get $-(B - 2C + E) + (2A - B + D) = 0$,
which implies $$2A - 2B + 2C + D - E = 0tag{5}$$



Solving equations $(1)$ through $(5)$ and letting $A=1$, we get



$$(A,B,C,D,E,F) = (1, -4, 4, -12, 6, 9)$$



So, the equation of the parabola becomes



$$x^2 - 4xy + 4y^2 - 12x + 6y + 9 = 0$$



Added because of something that I found out later.



If $A=0$, then $B^2=4AC$ implies $B=0$ and the equation becomes $Cy^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$.



If $A ne 0$, then $A < 0$ implies
$$(-A)x^2 +(-B)xy + (-C)y^2 + (-D)x + (-E)y + (-F) = 0$$
and $B^2=4AC iff (-B)^2 = 4(-A)(-C)$



So we may as well assume that $A = a^2 > 0$. Then



begin{align}
Ax^2 + Bxy + Cy^2
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(4Ax^2 + 4ABxy + B^2y^2) \
&= dfrac{1}{4A}(2Ax+By)^2 \
&= (ax+by)^2 \
end{align}



where $b = dfrac{B}{2a}$.



So we can write the most general form of a parabola as $$(ax + by)^2 + Dx +Ey +F=0$$



We can now argue much as I did above and get the same answer without being annoyed by the nonlinear equation $B^2 = 4AC$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 13 hours ago

























answered yesterday









steven gregory

17.1k22155




17.1k22155












  • You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
    – amd
    yesterday












  • @amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
    – steven gregory
    21 hours ago










  • That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
    – amd
    20 hours ago












  • @amd OK, how's this?
    – steven gregory
    13 hours ago










  • I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago


















  • You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
    – amd
    yesterday












  • @amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
    – steven gregory
    21 hours ago










  • That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
    – amd
    20 hours ago












  • @amd OK, how's this?
    – steven gregory
    13 hours ago










  • I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago
















You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
– amd
yesterday






You can’t assume that $A=1$ unless you have further information because that leaves out all parabolas with axes parallel to the $x$-axis, e.g., $y^2=x$. However, the quadratic part is always a perfect square (guaranteed by vanishing discriminant), so you can write it as $(alpha x+beta y)^2$.
– amd
yesterday














@amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
– steven gregory
21 hours ago




@amd It is clear from the data that the axis is not parallel to the $x$-axis.
– steven gregory
21 hours ago












That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
– amd
20 hours ago






That may be, but you’ve written that $(x+by)^2+dots$ is “the most general form of a parabola,” which it certainly isn’t. If you’re going to reject horizontal parabolas here, I think you ought to justify that somehow. It’s obvious post hoc, but what in the problem statement allows you to reject this case?
– amd
20 hours ago














@amd OK, how's this?
– steven gregory
13 hours ago




@amd OK, how's this?
– steven gregory
13 hours ago












I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
– Gesskay
3 hours ago




I think we can get the 6th equation when we Put T=0 for the general parabola equation and compare it with the line joining A(3,3) and B(1,-1)
– Gesskay
3 hours ago










up vote
1
down vote













Let’s continue with the geometric construction that you started.



enter image description here



Construct the parallelogram $AOBC$. The diagonal $OC$ is parallel to the parabola’s axis. We know that perpendicular tangents meet on the directrix, which is perpendicular to the parabola’s axis, so we now know its directrix $d$. Construct circles centered on $A$ and $B$ and tangent to $d$. Their intersection is the parabola’s focus. You can simply divide $overline{AB}$ proportionally to find this point: $F = {r_BA+r_ABover r_B+r_A}$. You can then use the point-point and point-line distance formulas to obtain a Cartesian equation for the parabola.



The construction in the preceding paragraph took advantage of the perpendicularity of the two tangents, but it’s quite easy to obtain a Cartesian equation of a parabola from any pair of points $P_0$ and $P_2$ on it and the tangents at those points: Let $P_1$ be the intersection of the tangents. A Bézier parameterization of the parabola is then $(1-t)^2P_0+2t(1-t)P_1+t^2P_2$. Eliminating $t$ gets you a Cartesian equation for it. In this case, the tangents intersect at the origin, so we have the parameterization $$x = 3(1-t)^2+t^2 = 4t^2-6t+3 \ y=3(1-t)^2-t^2 = 2t^2-6t+3.$$ Eliminating $t$ produces the equation $$x^2-4xy+4y^2-12x+6y+9=0.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
    – steven gregory
    yesterday










  • @stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
    – amd
    yesterday










  • @amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote













Let’s continue with the geometric construction that you started.



enter image description here



Construct the parallelogram $AOBC$. The diagonal $OC$ is parallel to the parabola’s axis. We know that perpendicular tangents meet on the directrix, which is perpendicular to the parabola’s axis, so we now know its directrix $d$. Construct circles centered on $A$ and $B$ and tangent to $d$. Their intersection is the parabola’s focus. You can simply divide $overline{AB}$ proportionally to find this point: $F = {r_BA+r_ABover r_B+r_A}$. You can then use the point-point and point-line distance formulas to obtain a Cartesian equation for the parabola.



The construction in the preceding paragraph took advantage of the perpendicularity of the two tangents, but it’s quite easy to obtain a Cartesian equation of a parabola from any pair of points $P_0$ and $P_2$ on it and the tangents at those points: Let $P_1$ be the intersection of the tangents. A Bézier parameterization of the parabola is then $(1-t)^2P_0+2t(1-t)P_1+t^2P_2$. Eliminating $t$ gets you a Cartesian equation for it. In this case, the tangents intersect at the origin, so we have the parameterization $$x = 3(1-t)^2+t^2 = 4t^2-6t+3 \ y=3(1-t)^2-t^2 = 2t^2-6t+3.$$ Eliminating $t$ produces the equation $$x^2-4xy+4y^2-12x+6y+9=0.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
    – steven gregory
    yesterday










  • @stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
    – amd
    yesterday










  • @amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote










up vote
1
down vote









Let’s continue with the geometric construction that you started.



enter image description here



Construct the parallelogram $AOBC$. The diagonal $OC$ is parallel to the parabola’s axis. We know that perpendicular tangents meet on the directrix, which is perpendicular to the parabola’s axis, so we now know its directrix $d$. Construct circles centered on $A$ and $B$ and tangent to $d$. Their intersection is the parabola’s focus. You can simply divide $overline{AB}$ proportionally to find this point: $F = {r_BA+r_ABover r_B+r_A}$. You can then use the point-point and point-line distance formulas to obtain a Cartesian equation for the parabola.



The construction in the preceding paragraph took advantage of the perpendicularity of the two tangents, but it’s quite easy to obtain a Cartesian equation of a parabola from any pair of points $P_0$ and $P_2$ on it and the tangents at those points: Let $P_1$ be the intersection of the tangents. A Bézier parameterization of the parabola is then $(1-t)^2P_0+2t(1-t)P_1+t^2P_2$. Eliminating $t$ gets you a Cartesian equation for it. In this case, the tangents intersect at the origin, so we have the parameterization $$x = 3(1-t)^2+t^2 = 4t^2-6t+3 \ y=3(1-t)^2-t^2 = 2t^2-6t+3.$$ Eliminating $t$ produces the equation $$x^2-4xy+4y^2-12x+6y+9=0.$$






share|cite|improve this answer














Let’s continue with the geometric construction that you started.



enter image description here



Construct the parallelogram $AOBC$. The diagonal $OC$ is parallel to the parabola’s axis. We know that perpendicular tangents meet on the directrix, which is perpendicular to the parabola’s axis, so we now know its directrix $d$. Construct circles centered on $A$ and $B$ and tangent to $d$. Their intersection is the parabola’s focus. You can simply divide $overline{AB}$ proportionally to find this point: $F = {r_BA+r_ABover r_B+r_A}$. You can then use the point-point and point-line distance formulas to obtain a Cartesian equation for the parabola.



The construction in the preceding paragraph took advantage of the perpendicularity of the two tangents, but it’s quite easy to obtain a Cartesian equation of a parabola from any pair of points $P_0$ and $P_2$ on it and the tangents at those points: Let $P_1$ be the intersection of the tangents. A Bézier parameterization of the parabola is then $(1-t)^2P_0+2t(1-t)P_1+t^2P_2$. Eliminating $t$ gets you a Cartesian equation for it. In this case, the tangents intersect at the origin, so we have the parameterization $$x = 3(1-t)^2+t^2 = 4t^2-6t+3 \ y=3(1-t)^2-t^2 = 2t^2-6t+3.$$ Eliminating $t$ produces the equation $$x^2-4xy+4y^2-12x+6y+9=0.$$







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited yesterday









steven gregory

17.1k22155




17.1k22155










answered yesterday









amd

28.3k21048




28.3k21048












  • Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
    – steven gregory
    yesterday










  • @stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
    – amd
    yesterday










  • @amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago


















  • Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
    – steven gregory
    yesterday










  • @stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
    – amd
    yesterday










  • @amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
    – Gesskay
    3 hours ago
















Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
– steven gregory
yesterday




Why is OC parallel to the parabola's axis?
– steven gregory
yesterday












@stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
– amd
yesterday




@stevengregory See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabola#Axis-direction.
– amd
yesterday












@amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
– Gesskay
3 hours ago




@amd,@stevengregoryThanks for all the support,but i think I found a shorter solution.Check my answer for the question
– Gesskay
3 hours ago


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2999165%2ffind-a-parabola-touches-the-line-y-x-and-y-x-at-a3-3-and-b1-1%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

AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater