Converse of focus-directrix property of conic sections

  • #1
arham_jain_hsr
22
7
TL;DR Summary
If the locus of some points follows the focus-directrix property, then is the curve ALWAYS the cross-section of a cone?
In my recent study of Conic Sections, I have come across several proofs (many of those comprise Dandelin spheres) showing that the cross-section of a cone indeed follows the focus-directrix property:

"For a section of a cone, the distance from a fixed point (the focus) is proportional to the distance from a fixed line (the directrix), the constant of proportionality being called the eccentricity."

But, in order to truly establish equivalence between the two definitions of the conic sections, I am curious to know whether the converse of this is also true. That is, if the locus of some points follows the focus-directrix property, then is the curve ALWAYS the cross-section of a cone?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You can calculate the equation of a general conic section in the plane of the section.

You can calculate the equation of a general plane curve that satisfies the focus-directrix property.

Now compare the two.
 
  • #3
pasmith said:
You can calculate the equation of a general conic section in the plane of the section.

You can calculate the equation of a general plane curve that satisfies the focus-directrix property.

Now compare the two.
For the focus-directrix property, the equations are fairly obvious, that the point should have a certain ratio with the focus and directrix. What are the conditions that govern the formation of equations for the section of a cone definition?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • General Math
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Math Guides, Tutorials and Articles
Replies
5
Views
8K
Replies
23
Views
8K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
31
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
935
Back
Top