At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
I think it's a elliptic paraboloid but I am not sure...
Just looking at the cross sections.
its either one of the bottom two graphs, i know that
I think it's the bottom left one.
But I am not sure :/ .
yea same here
What the heck is that shape even called? >.>
\[x^2+z^2 = sphere\]
Really? Isn't x^2+y^2+z^2= r a sphere?
you need y^2 for sphere
Yeah :P .
would it just be a cylinder
No. The cross sections are parabolas so there is no way it's a cylinder.
no just a circle
\[x^2+z^2 = 7\] is a circle :)
I know but... ;_; ... I thought the cross sections would be parabolas :/ .
the hare lost the race :P
which is again why i am not sure if it is the bottom left or the bottom right
K, so it the the bottom right apparantly : / .
Not sure why though.
Because it's not like with translate the circle.
i guess since its missing the \(y^2\)
why oh why?
why not two parabolas?
you mean a hyperbola? lol
It cannot be a hyperbola. No subtraction term appears.
wow I suck at "surface" geometry LOL so it is a circle yes? why not pick the one with a circle in the first place?
Because I assumed the cross sections would be parabolas so it did not seem logical to pick a cylinder :/ .
hey wouldnt it have to be x^2+y^2=7 to be parabolic? i think thats why its a cylinder
Well if I take z=0 then we get x^2=7 which is a parabola.
well x^2+y^2=7 is a circle.
nawwww… even if you drew just a 2-D circle, in microscopic view it is still "cylindrical" in shape
nincompoop get your wise self outta here :P
Well I DO AGREE it is indeed a circle about the x-z axis but how does that make it a cylinder? :/ .
Cylindrical coordinates are a generalization of two-dimensional polar coordinates to three dimensions by superposing a height (z) axis. Unfortunately, there are a number of different notations used for the other two coordinates. Either r or rho is used to refer to the radial coordinate and either phi or theta to the azimuthal coordinates. Arfken, for instance, uses (rho, phi, z), while Beyer uses (r, theta, z). In this work, the notation (r, theta, z) is used. The following table summarizes notational conventions used by a number of authors.
nice copy-pasting, dude! :D
jk jk...yea wolfram does say that it is a circle
@yummydum i know right, thnx bro :)
the cylinders that we know are just blown-up circles
What a stupid definition...
oh there's the definition lol
I don't like all these coordinate systems :/ .
they are useful
I don't see how... Just stick to rectangular coordinates :/ .
Thanks guys for all the help :) .
you mean just 2-D? awwww do you prefer them pixelated too? L M A O :P
don't be sad… the knowledge you will acquire is transferrable to different physical sciences.
As long as it's applicable to engineering...