The foci and rotation angle of an ellipse, $E_0$, as a function of the coefficients of an equation of $E_0$
Alan Horwitz

TL;DR
This paper derives formulas for the foci and rotation angle of an ellipse based on its algebraic equation coefficients, providing explicit relationships useful for geometric analysis.
Contribution
It introduces new explicit formulas linking ellipse foci and rotation angle directly to the coefficients of its defining equation.
Findings
Formulas for ellipse foci as functions of equation coefficients
Precise formula for ellipse rotation angle from coefficients
Theoretical foundation for geometric properties of ellipses
Abstract
First, we give a formula for the foci of an ellipse, , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of (see Theorem <ref>T2</ref>). To prove Theorem <ref>T2</ref>, we use two interesting formulas proven in <cite>B</cite> and in <cite>S</cite>. Our second result(see Theorem <ref>T3</ref>), is a more precise formula for the rotation angle of as a function of the coefficients of an equation of .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMathematics and Applications · Iterative Methods for Nonlinear Equations
The foci and rotation angle of an ellipse, , as a function of
the coefficients of an equation of
Alan Horwitz
(5/27/17)
Abstract
First, we give a formula for the foci of an ellipse, , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of (see Theorem 2). To prove Theorem 2, we use two interesting formulas proven in [1] and in [3]. Our second result(see Theorem 3), is a more precise formula for the rotation angle, , of , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of .
1 Introduction
The purpose of this note is two fold. First, we give a formula for the foci of an ellipse, , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of (see Theorem 2); To prove Theorem 2, we use two interesting formulas proven in [1] and in [3]. The main result in [1] expresses the foci of an ellipse, , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of , but also requires knowing the length of the major axis of ; We expand on that formula a little and give the proof here(see Theorem 1). A formula in [3] yields the length of the major axis of E_{0}\as a function of the coefficients(see Lemma 1). Theorem 1 and Lemma 1 then yield Theorem 2.
There are various ways to define the rotation angle, , of a non–circular ellipse, ; Below we define to be the counterclockwise angle of rotation to the major axis of from the line thru the center of and parallel to the axis, with ; No matter how one defines , it is always true that ; But what about a formula for itself ? Our second result(see Theorem 3), is a more precise formula for the rotation angle, , of , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of . The latter formula was submitted as a correction for the previous formula for the rotation angle given in [2]. The formula given here now appears in [2] in a slightly different form. The proof of Theorem 3 then follows easily from the proof of Theorem 1.
While the formulas given in this note are undoubedtly known, and there are other ways of proving them, we found it interesting to use and highlight the results in [1] and in [3].
2 Foci as a Function of the Coefficients
Throughout, for a given ellipse, , which is not a circle, we let denote the counterclockwise angle of rotation to the major axis of from the line thru the center of and parallel to the axis, with ; We let center of length of semi–major and length of semi–minor axes of , respectively. Finally, we let denote the rightmost focus of (if , we let denote the uppermost focus). Knowing easily yields the other focus, ;
We now state an extension, and give a detailed proof, of the result in [1]. (i) gives the equation of an ellipse, , given the foci of , while (ii) gives the foci of given the equation of . In each case, one must also know the length of the semi–major axis of .
Theorem 1
Let be an ellipse which is not a circle, let be the rightmost focus of , and let be the center of .
(i) Then the equation of can be written in the form , where , and .
(ii) If the equation of is written in the form , where , then
[TABLE]
In addition, if , then , while if , then . Finally,
[TABLE]
Proof. It is clear that we may assume that , so that the equation of has the form
[TABLE]
The implicit assumption in [1] is that ; We outline the proof in the case when as well. If , then lies in quadrant 1, while if , then lies in quadrant 4; Letting , we then have
[TABLE]
Recall that if , then is the uppermost focus. Proceeding as in [1](we include the details here for completeness), we have:
, which implies that
, and so
; Some simplification yields
, and using gives
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and , which proves (i). To prove (ii): Note that and .
Case 1:
Then by (6), which implies that by (4); If , then and by (4), which implies that , and ; If , then and by (4), which implies that , and ; That proves (1).
Case 2:
Then or by (6); If , then by (6) again, , which implies that , and so ; Thus , which implies that by (4) and so ; If , then , which implies that , and so ; Thus , which implies that by (4) and so ; That proves (2).
For the following two lemmas, we let and . The following result can be found in [3].
Lemma 1
Suppose that is an ellipse with equation ; Let and denote the lengths of the semi–major and semi–minor axes, respectively, of , and let . Then
[TABLE]
We state the following useful general lemma about equations of ellipses. The second condition ensures that the conic is non–degenerate, while the first condition ensures that the conic is an ellipse.
Lemma 2
The equation , with , is the equation of an ellipse if and only if and .
Using Lemma 1, we are now able to give a formula for the foci of , given an equation of , without knowing the length of the semi–major axis of , as with Theorem 1.
Theorem 2
Let be an ellipse which is not a circle, and let ; Let be the rightmost focus of and let be the center of . If the equation of is written in the form , where , then
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Remark 1
To use Theorem 2, one must first rewrite the equation of so that it has the form given in Theorem 2. First one writes the equation of in the form using the formula , ; One can then obtain without needing to know or since it follows easily by Lemma 1 that , where is any given equation of . Multiplying thru by then yields the proper form.
Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 1, we may assume, without loss of generality, that , so that the equation of has the form . By Lemma 2, , and by Lemma 1, with and , we have , which implies that ; Also by Lemma 1, ; Thus , and so ; Hence , which implies, by Lemma 1, that . Substituting and into Theorem 1 yields Theorem 2.
3 Rotation Angle
Below we give a formula for the rotation angle, , of a non–circular ellipse, , as a function of the coefficients of an equation of . We also give a simple formula for . Here we are assuming that .
Theorem 3
Let be an ellipse with equation , with ; Let denote the counterclockwise angle of rotation to the major axis of from the line thru the center of and parallel to the axis, with ;Let .
(i) \theta=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}(1+\mathop{\mathrm{s}gn}B)\dfrac{\pi}{4}+\dfrac{1}{2}\cot^{-1}\left(\dfrac{A-C}{B}\right)&\text{if }B\neq 0\\ {\large(}1+\mathop{\mathrm{s}gn}(A-C){\large)}\dfrac{\pi}{4}&\text{if }B=0\end{array}\right. and
(ii) if or and .
Remark 2
Note that if and , we have a circle and hence no rotation angle.
Proof. Again, we assume that , where has center ; By (6) and (4), , and for any ; We use the well–known formula , which implies that or , depending upon whether lies in quadrant 1 or quadrant 2. Note that ;
Case 1:
If , then , which implies that and so ; Thus ; If , then , which implies that and so ; Thus .
**Case 2: **
Then , which implies that or ; If , then , which implies that and so ; If , then , which implies that and so . That proves (i).
While one could use the fact that , we find it easier to proceed as follows to prove (ii). Now by (4),
Case 1:
Then by Theorem 2, and , which implies that
; Now simplifies to , and using the inequality for any ; Thus ;
Case 2:
If , then by Theorem 2, and , and the rest follows as above.
4 Example
Consider the ellipse with equation ; Using , , , , and , one has and ; Using Remark 1 yields and , ; Rewriting the equation gives ; Multiplying thru by yields ; Now we have , , , and ; By Theorem 2, , which implies that ; By Theorem 3, ; One can verify that ;
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] C. Bond, ”A New Algorithm for Scan Conversion of a General Ellipse”, http://www.crbond.com/papers/ell_alg.pdf
- 2[2] http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Ellipse.html
- 3[3] Mohamed Ali Said, ”Calibration of an Ellipse’s Algebraic Equation and Direct Determination of its Parameters”, Acta Mathematica Academiae Paedagogicae Ny regyh aziensis Vol.19, No. 2 (2003), 221–225.
