-1

How do you get to the general equation of $y = ax^2 + bx + c$ for a parabola?

I have not found any resources that show how to get to that equation.

This equation is shown 1 minute 30 into this video on Simpsons Rule https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpfy3sGw8tI.

Rory Daulton
  • 32,288
  • https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dhoh4TmPzu1w&ved=2ahUKEwiGnMWa6rHkAhXllOAKHeDIArUQwqsBMAB6BAgDEAU&usg=AOvVaw2N9L61Bk4cBRU1bph0lL-m –  Sep 02 '19 at 09:32
  • 1
    What is your definition of a parabola? As I recall for me the definition was a curve satisfying a quadratic equation, so there would be nothing to prove. – Floris Claassens Sep 02 '19 at 09:34
  • 1
    The original definition was the set of points equidistant from a given point (the "focus") and a given line (the "directrix"). With the constraint that the directrix be horizontal you can prove the equation must be of the form $y=ax^2+bx+c$. Maybe that's what Rob wants to do. – Gerry Myerson Sep 02 '19 at 09:46
  • @GerryMyerson That's exactly right the proof of that formula. Do you know how to prove it? The youtube video show what the shape is like on the graph, it's not a true parabola, but it's the equation which helps proves simpsons rule.

    The aim of my question is to work out how to get y = ax^2 + bx + c, I follow the Simpsons rule fine.

    – Rob Wilkinson Sep 02 '19 at 10:09
  • This page and many others might be useful. – Toby Mak Sep 02 '19 at 11:17
  • Then Rory's answer is what you want, Rob? – Gerry Myerson Sep 02 '19 at 12:49
  • This isn’t the general equation of a parabola. It’s the equation of a parabola with an axis parallel to the $y$-axis. – amd Sep 02 '19 at 20:28
  • Are you still here, Rob? – Gerry Myerson Sep 03 '19 at 23:14
  • @GerryMyerson Yes Rory's answer looks like it is good help. I will have to look through how to get the formula from the start in detail when I get spare time. It's always nice sometimes to know how a formula is arrived at. I am happy with responses to my post. – Rob Wilkinson Sep 04 '19 at 04:36
  • Good. If you are satisfied by an answer, I encourage you to "accept" it by clicking in the check mark next to it. – Gerry Myerson Sep 04 '19 at 05:27
  • Today would be a good day to do that. – Gerry Myerson Sep 05 '19 at 11:55

3 Answers3

5

Since you show little work of your own, I'll just give an outline and let you fill in the details. If you need more detail, show some more work of your own then ask.

Your question involves two parts. First, given a parabola with a horizontal directrix, show that an equation of the form $y = ax^2+bx+c$ with $a\neq 0$ determines it. Let's say that the parabola's focus is at $(r,s)$ and the directrix is the line $y=t$. Note that we must have $s\neq t$, which means the focus is not on the directrix. The geometric definition of the parabola is that the distance from any point on the parabola $(x,y)$ to the focus equals the distance from that point to the directrix. The distance formulas are easy, so equate the two and we get

$$\sqrt{(x-r)^2+(y-s)^2}=|y-t|$$

We can convert that equation to an equivalent one by squaring both sides (I'll leave it to you to show this does not add any new solutions) and solving for $y$. We end up with

$$y = \left(\frac{1}{2(s-t)}\right)x^2+\left(\frac{-r}{s-t}\right)x+\left(\frac{r^2+s^2-t^2}{2(s-t)}\right)$$

Since we know that $s-t$ is not zero and it is clear that $\frac{1}{2(s-t)}$ is also not zero, this equation has the desired form $y=ax^2+bx+c$ with $a\neq 0$.

The next part is to show that the curve defined by $ax^2+bx+c$ where $a\neq 0$ is a geometric parabola. First complete the square to get the form

$$y=a(x-h)^2+k$$

where again $a\neq 0$. Then show that this is also the equation for the parabola with its focus at the point $(h,k+\frac{1}{4a})$ and directrix at the horizontal line $y=k-\frac{1}{4a}$. These are well-defined since $a\neq 0$ and clearly the focus is not on the directrix. I'll leave this second part to you--you can use the first part above to help.

Rory Daulton
  • 32,288
0

One way to show that the general quation$\,y=ax^2+bx+c\,$ is a parabola is to show that any such equation (with $a\ne 0$) is transformed by a unique homothety-translation into $\,y=x^2\,$ and verify that its focus is $\,(0,d)\,$ and directrix is $\,y=-d\,$ as in the article parabola by showing that $\,x^2+(y-d)^2 = (y+d)^2\,$ where $\,d=1/4.\,$

NOTE: the general equation is only for parabolas whose directrix is parallel to the $x$-axis. Also the recent MSE question 3342798 "Why does the focus-directrix definition of the parabola work?" has an answer to a converse question.

Somos
  • 35,251
  • 3
  • 30
  • 76
0

The relationship is basic coming in next after the linear relation. It better to learn fundamentals as such. If anyone asks to prove that $ y=ax+b$ for linear relations, then...you see?

It is the integration step coming next after the straight line

$$ y'= 2 a x + b $$

$$ y = a x^2+ bx +c \tag1 $$

where c is a constant of integration.

If two real or complex (p,q) values for $x$ are both valid then we must have the product of zeros to be a zero

$$ x^2- (p+q)x + pq = (x-p) (x-q) =0 $$

Setting the sum $ p+q = -b/a $ and product $pq= c/a $ in the above we obtain (1) in alternate form.

In uniform motion ( going back to Newton understanding dynamic parabolic relations) if a particle attempts to move after annulling/compensating whatever length or distance $c$ gained moving to left with starting velocity to right $ b $ along while uniformly accelerating $a/2 $ towards right, then after $x$ seconds the particle will stay put always at the same location with zero displacement...i.e., never moves.. indicated by zero of the quadratic equation.

$$ c + b x + a x^2 =0 $$

Narasimham
  • 40,495