Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

How can we prove that a point that follows another point has the same trajectory given a contant angle and ratio?

+0
−0

So suppose that we have a point called $P$ that moves along the circle $O_1$. The parametric equations of $P$ are given by:$$\begin{aligned}x(t) &= \cos(t) + 5 \\y(t) &= \sin(t) + 3 \\&\text{Or}\\\overrightarrow{P(t)} &= \begin{Bmatrix}\cos(t) + 5 \\\sin(t) + 3\end{Bmatrix}\end{aligned}$$ This point $P$ is connected to the point $A(0,0)$. Another line segment from $A$ that is connect to a point is called $Q$. The angle between the two line segments is $\alpha$, and the ratio between the lengths of the two segments is a constant $k$. We want to determine the trajectory of point $Q$. It seems obvious that the trajectory of $Q$ is a circle, but I found out that it's quite difficult to prove it. Because I couldn't see how to use the dot product correctly.

Here is an image of the situation I described (one of the possible situations): Trajectory of two points

I attempted to use the dot product as follows:$$\cos(\alpha)=\frac{\overrightarrow{P(t)}\cdot\overrightarrow{Q(t)}}{|\overrightarrow{P(t)}|\cdot|\overrightarrow{Q(t)|}}$$ However, this approach did not help me isolate the term involving $\overrightarrow{Q(t)}$. I could have proven that the trajectory of $Q$ is a circle if $\alpha$ is $90$ degrees, but not for a general angle $\alpha$. Is there an extra formula that I need to use or did I need to use another approach?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

1 answer

+3
−0

The dot product cannot be sufficient because even making substitutions to minimise the occurrences of $Q$ we get $$\cos(\alpha)=\frac{\overrightarrow{P(t)}\cdot\overrightarrow{Q(t)}}{k|\overrightarrow{P(t)}|^2}$$ there are two solutions in the plane.

I personally would tackle this by complex numbers, but to keep it more geometric we can express the relationship as $$Q(t) = k \begin{pmatrix} \cos(\alpha) & \sin(\alpha) \\ -\sin(\alpha) & \cos(\alpha) \end{pmatrix} P(t)$$

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

Thank you for your answer. May I ask how you derived this expression for $Q(t)$? Because I'm not very... (3 comments)

Sign up to answer this question »