The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Synthetic Geometry proof and Analytical Geometry proof that Conic is
a Oval, never an ellipse// yes Apollonius was wrong

Replies: 5   Last Post: Oct 7, 2017 1:48 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 17,520
Registered: 3/31/08
Re: mounting evidence Re: ..proof that Conic is a Oval, never an
ellipse// yes Apollonius was wrong

Posted: Oct 7, 2017 12:38 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:02:40 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now we have more and more supporting evidence coming in that Conic section is an Oval, never an ellipse.
>
> 1) in order to get a ellipse out of a cone, what we have to do is use a knife that makes a butterfly cut
> such as this
>
> \ /
> \ /
>
> And once cut we flatten out the butterfly cut to be an ellipse
>
> And in the same manner, a Cylinder section is always a Ellipse, and to get a oval from cylinder we use this Butterfly cut, an asymmetrical butterfly cut.
>
> 2) Another new supporting evidence is the square pyramid replacing the cone. Now a square pyramid section if the conic was a ellipse, we should expect the pyramid section to be a rectangle, for the rectangle is the analog of the ellipse. Instead, what we get in a cut is a trapezoid, the analog of a oval.
>
> So, more and more evidence mounts, that the conic section is oval, never ellipse.
>
>


In that evidence of (2) begs the question of what is the analog of the Cylinder, since the cylinder section is truly a ellipse, but the cone section is an oval. So the analog of the Cylinder is a Rectangular solid and if you section the solid, you get just longer rectangles. So that a rectangle is the analog of an ellipse. Now if you section the square pyramid you get a trapezoid, never a rectangle.

So that is probably the most effective argument that anyone preaching a ellipse is a conic, is a failed screwball of perception.

The cone and cylinder is analog to square pyramid and rectangular solid.

Only a magnanimous fiend would want you to believe that a conic and cylinder both yield a ellipse, when one figure is OBVIOUSLY different from the other. Creeps, want other people to be creeps like themselves.

AP




Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.