How can we find some radius of circle which fully contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by=0$?
$begingroup$
How can we find some radius of circle with center at origin which contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by=0$,
where $pi/2>a>0$ and $pi/2>b>0$.
I'm not sure how can we prove that these inequalities should hold so we can have closed curve: $pi/2>a$ and $pi/2>b$ .
Also very interesting similar equation $xarctan(x)-ax+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-b(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-cy=0$.
I need some approximate estimation so I can prove that for some radius this estimation will be correct.
For example I've found such a circle for $a=1.5$ and $b=1.5$:
And for $xarctan(x)-1.5x+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-1.5(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-1.5y=0$:
Maybe Lagrange multipliers can help?
I'm also interested in higher dimensions where we can add $z$ and find some radius of a sphere which fully contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by+zarctan(z)-cz=0$. But I think it can be done in similar way as for two dimensions.
maxima-minima implicit-function
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How can we find some radius of circle with center at origin which contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by=0$,
where $pi/2>a>0$ and $pi/2>b>0$.
I'm not sure how can we prove that these inequalities should hold so we can have closed curve: $pi/2>a$ and $pi/2>b$ .
Also very interesting similar equation $xarctan(x)-ax+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-b(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-cy=0$.
I need some approximate estimation so I can prove that for some radius this estimation will be correct.
For example I've found such a circle for $a=1.5$ and $b=1.5$:
And for $xarctan(x)-1.5x+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-1.5(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-1.5y=0$:
Maybe Lagrange multipliers can help?
I'm also interested in higher dimensions where we can add $z$ and find some radius of a sphere which fully contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by+zarctan(z)-cz=0$. But I think it can be done in similar way as for two dimensions.
maxima-minima implicit-function
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How can we find some radius of circle with center at origin which contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by=0$,
where $pi/2>a>0$ and $pi/2>b>0$.
I'm not sure how can we prove that these inequalities should hold so we can have closed curve: $pi/2>a$ and $pi/2>b$ .
Also very interesting similar equation $xarctan(x)-ax+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-b(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-cy=0$.
I need some approximate estimation so I can prove that for some radius this estimation will be correct.
For example I've found such a circle for $a=1.5$ and $b=1.5$:
And for $xarctan(x)-1.5x+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-1.5(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-1.5y=0$:
Maybe Lagrange multipliers can help?
I'm also interested in higher dimensions where we can add $z$ and find some radius of a sphere which fully contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by+zarctan(z)-cz=0$. But I think it can be done in similar way as for two dimensions.
maxima-minima implicit-function
$endgroup$
How can we find some radius of circle with center at origin which contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by=0$,
where $pi/2>a>0$ and $pi/2>b>0$.
I'm not sure how can we prove that these inequalities should hold so we can have closed curve: $pi/2>a$ and $pi/2>b$ .
Also very interesting similar equation $xarctan(x)-ax+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-b(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-cy=0$.
I need some approximate estimation so I can prove that for some radius this estimation will be correct.
For example I've found such a circle for $a=1.5$ and $b=1.5$:
And for $xarctan(x)-1.5x+(-x+y)arctan(-x+y)-1.5(-x+y)+yarctan(y)-1.5y=0$:
Maybe Lagrange multipliers can help?
I'm also interested in higher dimensions where we can add $z$ and find some radius of a sphere which fully contains $xarctan(x)-ax+yarctan(y)-by+zarctan(z)-cz=0$. But I think it can be done in similar way as for two dimensions.
maxima-minima implicit-function
maxima-minima implicit-function
edited Dec 10 '18 at 17:03
Tag
asked Dec 10 '18 at 15:22
TagTag
696
696
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Definition. Given $ainmathbb R$, define the function $f_a(x)=x(arctan x-a)$.
Definition. Given $a,binmathbb R$, consider the closed set
$$
begin{split}
E_{a,b} &= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : x(arctan x-a)+y(arctan y-b)=0} \
&= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0}
end{split}
$$
Lemma 1. For every $ainmathbb R$, the set $[0,infty)$ is in the image of $f_a$.
Proof. Assume $ageq0$. Then $f_a(0)=0$ and
$$
lim_{xto-infty}x(arctan x-a)=(-pi/2-a) lim_{xto-infty}x=infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continous, these limits imply the thesis. The case $aleq0$ is analogous, with the signs changed. □
Lemma 2. If $|a|>pi/2$, then the function $f_a:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is surjective.
Proof. Assume $a>pi/2$. We have $pmpi/2-a < 0$, so
$$
lim_{xto+infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty} x = -infty
$$
and
$$
lim_{xto-infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (-pi/2-a)lim_{xto-infty} x = infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continuous, these limits imply that it is surjective. The case $a<-pi/2$ is analogous. □
Lemma 3. If $|a|<pi/2$, then
$$
lim_{xtopminfty} f_a(x) = infty.
$$
Proof. A direct computation shows
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_a(x) = (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty}x = infty
$$
and the same holds for $xto-infty$. □
Proposition. If $|a|>pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Since $f_a$ is surjective by Lemma 2, for every $yinmathbb R$ there exists $xinmathbb R$ such that $f_a(x)=-f_b(y)$. This means that $(x,y)in E_{a,b}$. Therefore the set $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded because we can find points with arbitrary large $y$.
Proposition. If $|a|=pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Assume $a=pi/2$. The other case is analogous. Recall the well known limit
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_{pi/2}(x) = lim_{xtoinfty} x(arctan x-pi/2) = -1.
$$
For every $x$ sufficiently large we have that $f_{pi/2}(x)leq0$, so by Lemma 1 there exists $yinmathbb R$ such that $f_b(y)=-f_a(x)in[0,infty)$. Therefore we can find points $(x,y)in E_{pi/2,b}$ with arbitrary large $x$. □
Proposition. If $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$, then $E_{a,b}$ is bounded.
Proof. By Lemma 3, the function $f_a(x)+f_b(y)$ is coercive, meaning that $f_a(x)+f_b(y)toinfty$ if $|(x,y)|toinfty$, therefore its sublevel sets are bounded. In particular $E_{a,b}$ is bounded as a consequence. □
Corollary. $E_{a,b}$ is bounded if and only if $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$.
Now, given $a,bin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, how can we find an estimate on $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$? We could try the Lagrange multipliers approach again, similarly to what we did here.
The stationary points must satisfy
$$
bigl(f'_a(x), f'_b(y)bigr) = lambda (x, y) qquad text{for some $lambdainmathbb R$},
$$
which is equivalent to
$$
frac1{1+x^2} + frac{arctan x-a}x
= frac{f'_a(x)}{x} = lambda
= frac{f'_b(y)}{y}
=frac1{1+y^2} + frac{arctan y-b}y.
$$
Unfortunately, this time I'm not able to find a closed form solution to the system of equations
$$
left{begin{array}{l}
f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0 , \
frac{f'_a(x)}x=frac{f'_b(y)}y .
end{array}right.
$$
One can of course fall back to numerical solutions. I'm using Mathematica for that.
Here I fix the values $a=3/2$ and $b=5/4$, then I find extremal points numerically both with the built-in NMaximize
function and by solving the Lagrange multiplier system with FindRoot
. The two solutions are the same, up to machine precision. Then I plot the set $E_{a,b}$ in blue, the root locus of the Lagrange multiplier equation in orange, and the smallest fitting circle in gray.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
|
show 14 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3034053%2fhow-can-we-find-some-radius-of-circle-which-fully-contains-x-arctanx-axy-arc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Definition. Given $ainmathbb R$, define the function $f_a(x)=x(arctan x-a)$.
Definition. Given $a,binmathbb R$, consider the closed set
$$
begin{split}
E_{a,b} &= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : x(arctan x-a)+y(arctan y-b)=0} \
&= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0}
end{split}
$$
Lemma 1. For every $ainmathbb R$, the set $[0,infty)$ is in the image of $f_a$.
Proof. Assume $ageq0$. Then $f_a(0)=0$ and
$$
lim_{xto-infty}x(arctan x-a)=(-pi/2-a) lim_{xto-infty}x=infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continous, these limits imply the thesis. The case $aleq0$ is analogous, with the signs changed. □
Lemma 2. If $|a|>pi/2$, then the function $f_a:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is surjective.
Proof. Assume $a>pi/2$. We have $pmpi/2-a < 0$, so
$$
lim_{xto+infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty} x = -infty
$$
and
$$
lim_{xto-infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (-pi/2-a)lim_{xto-infty} x = infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continuous, these limits imply that it is surjective. The case $a<-pi/2$ is analogous. □
Lemma 3. If $|a|<pi/2$, then
$$
lim_{xtopminfty} f_a(x) = infty.
$$
Proof. A direct computation shows
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_a(x) = (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty}x = infty
$$
and the same holds for $xto-infty$. □
Proposition. If $|a|>pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Since $f_a$ is surjective by Lemma 2, for every $yinmathbb R$ there exists $xinmathbb R$ such that $f_a(x)=-f_b(y)$. This means that $(x,y)in E_{a,b}$. Therefore the set $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded because we can find points with arbitrary large $y$.
Proposition. If $|a|=pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Assume $a=pi/2$. The other case is analogous. Recall the well known limit
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_{pi/2}(x) = lim_{xtoinfty} x(arctan x-pi/2) = -1.
$$
For every $x$ sufficiently large we have that $f_{pi/2}(x)leq0$, so by Lemma 1 there exists $yinmathbb R$ such that $f_b(y)=-f_a(x)in[0,infty)$. Therefore we can find points $(x,y)in E_{pi/2,b}$ with arbitrary large $x$. □
Proposition. If $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$, then $E_{a,b}$ is bounded.
Proof. By Lemma 3, the function $f_a(x)+f_b(y)$ is coercive, meaning that $f_a(x)+f_b(y)toinfty$ if $|(x,y)|toinfty$, therefore its sublevel sets are bounded. In particular $E_{a,b}$ is bounded as a consequence. □
Corollary. $E_{a,b}$ is bounded if and only if $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$.
Now, given $a,bin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, how can we find an estimate on $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$? We could try the Lagrange multipliers approach again, similarly to what we did here.
The stationary points must satisfy
$$
bigl(f'_a(x), f'_b(y)bigr) = lambda (x, y) qquad text{for some $lambdainmathbb R$},
$$
which is equivalent to
$$
frac1{1+x^2} + frac{arctan x-a}x
= frac{f'_a(x)}{x} = lambda
= frac{f'_b(y)}{y}
=frac1{1+y^2} + frac{arctan y-b}y.
$$
Unfortunately, this time I'm not able to find a closed form solution to the system of equations
$$
left{begin{array}{l}
f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0 , \
frac{f'_a(x)}x=frac{f'_b(y)}y .
end{array}right.
$$
One can of course fall back to numerical solutions. I'm using Mathematica for that.
Here I fix the values $a=3/2$ and $b=5/4$, then I find extremal points numerically both with the built-in NMaximize
function and by solving the Lagrange multiplier system with FindRoot
. The two solutions are the same, up to machine precision. Then I plot the set $E_{a,b}$ in blue, the root locus of the Lagrange multiplier equation in orange, and the smallest fitting circle in gray.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
Definition. Given $ainmathbb R$, define the function $f_a(x)=x(arctan x-a)$.
Definition. Given $a,binmathbb R$, consider the closed set
$$
begin{split}
E_{a,b} &= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : x(arctan x-a)+y(arctan y-b)=0} \
&= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0}
end{split}
$$
Lemma 1. For every $ainmathbb R$, the set $[0,infty)$ is in the image of $f_a$.
Proof. Assume $ageq0$. Then $f_a(0)=0$ and
$$
lim_{xto-infty}x(arctan x-a)=(-pi/2-a) lim_{xto-infty}x=infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continous, these limits imply the thesis. The case $aleq0$ is analogous, with the signs changed. □
Lemma 2. If $|a|>pi/2$, then the function $f_a:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is surjective.
Proof. Assume $a>pi/2$. We have $pmpi/2-a < 0$, so
$$
lim_{xto+infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty} x = -infty
$$
and
$$
lim_{xto-infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (-pi/2-a)lim_{xto-infty} x = infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continuous, these limits imply that it is surjective. The case $a<-pi/2$ is analogous. □
Lemma 3. If $|a|<pi/2$, then
$$
lim_{xtopminfty} f_a(x) = infty.
$$
Proof. A direct computation shows
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_a(x) = (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty}x = infty
$$
and the same holds for $xto-infty$. □
Proposition. If $|a|>pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Since $f_a$ is surjective by Lemma 2, for every $yinmathbb R$ there exists $xinmathbb R$ such that $f_a(x)=-f_b(y)$. This means that $(x,y)in E_{a,b}$. Therefore the set $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded because we can find points with arbitrary large $y$.
Proposition. If $|a|=pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Assume $a=pi/2$. The other case is analogous. Recall the well known limit
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_{pi/2}(x) = lim_{xtoinfty} x(arctan x-pi/2) = -1.
$$
For every $x$ sufficiently large we have that $f_{pi/2}(x)leq0$, so by Lemma 1 there exists $yinmathbb R$ such that $f_b(y)=-f_a(x)in[0,infty)$. Therefore we can find points $(x,y)in E_{pi/2,b}$ with arbitrary large $x$. □
Proposition. If $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$, then $E_{a,b}$ is bounded.
Proof. By Lemma 3, the function $f_a(x)+f_b(y)$ is coercive, meaning that $f_a(x)+f_b(y)toinfty$ if $|(x,y)|toinfty$, therefore its sublevel sets are bounded. In particular $E_{a,b}$ is bounded as a consequence. □
Corollary. $E_{a,b}$ is bounded if and only if $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$.
Now, given $a,bin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, how can we find an estimate on $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$? We could try the Lagrange multipliers approach again, similarly to what we did here.
The stationary points must satisfy
$$
bigl(f'_a(x), f'_b(y)bigr) = lambda (x, y) qquad text{for some $lambdainmathbb R$},
$$
which is equivalent to
$$
frac1{1+x^2} + frac{arctan x-a}x
= frac{f'_a(x)}{x} = lambda
= frac{f'_b(y)}{y}
=frac1{1+y^2} + frac{arctan y-b}y.
$$
Unfortunately, this time I'm not able to find a closed form solution to the system of equations
$$
left{begin{array}{l}
f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0 , \
frac{f'_a(x)}x=frac{f'_b(y)}y .
end{array}right.
$$
One can of course fall back to numerical solutions. I'm using Mathematica for that.
Here I fix the values $a=3/2$ and $b=5/4$, then I find extremal points numerically both with the built-in NMaximize
function and by solving the Lagrange multiplier system with FindRoot
. The two solutions are the same, up to machine precision. Then I plot the set $E_{a,b}$ in blue, the root locus of the Lagrange multiplier equation in orange, and the smallest fitting circle in gray.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
Definition. Given $ainmathbb R$, define the function $f_a(x)=x(arctan x-a)$.
Definition. Given $a,binmathbb R$, consider the closed set
$$
begin{split}
E_{a,b} &= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : x(arctan x-a)+y(arctan y-b)=0} \
&= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0}
end{split}
$$
Lemma 1. For every $ainmathbb R$, the set $[0,infty)$ is in the image of $f_a$.
Proof. Assume $ageq0$. Then $f_a(0)=0$ and
$$
lim_{xto-infty}x(arctan x-a)=(-pi/2-a) lim_{xto-infty}x=infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continous, these limits imply the thesis. The case $aleq0$ is analogous, with the signs changed. □
Lemma 2. If $|a|>pi/2$, then the function $f_a:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is surjective.
Proof. Assume $a>pi/2$. We have $pmpi/2-a < 0$, so
$$
lim_{xto+infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty} x = -infty
$$
and
$$
lim_{xto-infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (-pi/2-a)lim_{xto-infty} x = infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continuous, these limits imply that it is surjective. The case $a<-pi/2$ is analogous. □
Lemma 3. If $|a|<pi/2$, then
$$
lim_{xtopminfty} f_a(x) = infty.
$$
Proof. A direct computation shows
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_a(x) = (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty}x = infty
$$
and the same holds for $xto-infty$. □
Proposition. If $|a|>pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Since $f_a$ is surjective by Lemma 2, for every $yinmathbb R$ there exists $xinmathbb R$ such that $f_a(x)=-f_b(y)$. This means that $(x,y)in E_{a,b}$. Therefore the set $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded because we can find points with arbitrary large $y$.
Proposition. If $|a|=pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Assume $a=pi/2$. The other case is analogous. Recall the well known limit
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_{pi/2}(x) = lim_{xtoinfty} x(arctan x-pi/2) = -1.
$$
For every $x$ sufficiently large we have that $f_{pi/2}(x)leq0$, so by Lemma 1 there exists $yinmathbb R$ such that $f_b(y)=-f_a(x)in[0,infty)$. Therefore we can find points $(x,y)in E_{pi/2,b}$ with arbitrary large $x$. □
Proposition. If $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$, then $E_{a,b}$ is bounded.
Proof. By Lemma 3, the function $f_a(x)+f_b(y)$ is coercive, meaning that $f_a(x)+f_b(y)toinfty$ if $|(x,y)|toinfty$, therefore its sublevel sets are bounded. In particular $E_{a,b}$ is bounded as a consequence. □
Corollary. $E_{a,b}$ is bounded if and only if $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$.
Now, given $a,bin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, how can we find an estimate on $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$? We could try the Lagrange multipliers approach again, similarly to what we did here.
The stationary points must satisfy
$$
bigl(f'_a(x), f'_b(y)bigr) = lambda (x, y) qquad text{for some $lambdainmathbb R$},
$$
which is equivalent to
$$
frac1{1+x^2} + frac{arctan x-a}x
= frac{f'_a(x)}{x} = lambda
= frac{f'_b(y)}{y}
=frac1{1+y^2} + frac{arctan y-b}y.
$$
Unfortunately, this time I'm not able to find a closed form solution to the system of equations
$$
left{begin{array}{l}
f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0 , \
frac{f'_a(x)}x=frac{f'_b(y)}y .
end{array}right.
$$
One can of course fall back to numerical solutions. I'm using Mathematica for that.
Here I fix the values $a=3/2$ and $b=5/4$, then I find extremal points numerically both with the built-in NMaximize
function and by solving the Lagrange multiplier system with FindRoot
. The two solutions are the same, up to machine precision. Then I plot the set $E_{a,b}$ in blue, the root locus of the Lagrange multiplier equation in orange, and the smallest fitting circle in gray.
$endgroup$
Definition. Given $ainmathbb R$, define the function $f_a(x)=x(arctan x-a)$.
Definition. Given $a,binmathbb R$, consider the closed set
$$
begin{split}
E_{a,b} &= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : x(arctan x-a)+y(arctan y-b)=0} \
&= {(x,y)inmathbb R^2 : f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0}
end{split}
$$
Lemma 1. For every $ainmathbb R$, the set $[0,infty)$ is in the image of $f_a$.
Proof. Assume $ageq0$. Then $f_a(0)=0$ and
$$
lim_{xto-infty}x(arctan x-a)=(-pi/2-a) lim_{xto-infty}x=infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continous, these limits imply the thesis. The case $aleq0$ is analogous, with the signs changed. □
Lemma 2. If $|a|>pi/2$, then the function $f_a:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is surjective.
Proof. Assume $a>pi/2$. We have $pmpi/2-a < 0$, so
$$
lim_{xto+infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty} x = -infty
$$
and
$$
lim_{xto-infty} x(arctan x-a)
= (-pi/2-a)lim_{xto-infty} x = infty.
$$
Since $f_a$ is continuous, these limits imply that it is surjective. The case $a<-pi/2$ is analogous. □
Lemma 3. If $|a|<pi/2$, then
$$
lim_{xtopminfty} f_a(x) = infty.
$$
Proof. A direct computation shows
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_a(x) = (pi/2-a)lim_{xtoinfty}x = infty
$$
and the same holds for $xto-infty$. □
Proposition. If $|a|>pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Since $f_a$ is surjective by Lemma 2, for every $yinmathbb R$ there exists $xinmathbb R$ such that $f_a(x)=-f_b(y)$. This means that $(x,y)in E_{a,b}$. Therefore the set $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded because we can find points with arbitrary large $y$.
Proposition. If $|a|=pi/2$. Then $E_{a,b}$ is unbounded.
Proof. Assume $a=pi/2$. The other case is analogous. Recall the well known limit
$$
lim_{xtoinfty} f_{pi/2}(x) = lim_{xtoinfty} x(arctan x-pi/2) = -1.
$$
For every $x$ sufficiently large we have that $f_{pi/2}(x)leq0$, so by Lemma 1 there exists $yinmathbb R$ such that $f_b(y)=-f_a(x)in[0,infty)$. Therefore we can find points $(x,y)in E_{pi/2,b}$ with arbitrary large $x$. □
Proposition. If $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$, then $E_{a,b}$ is bounded.
Proof. By Lemma 3, the function $f_a(x)+f_b(y)$ is coercive, meaning that $f_a(x)+f_b(y)toinfty$ if $|(x,y)|toinfty$, therefore its sublevel sets are bounded. In particular $E_{a,b}$ is bounded as a consequence. □
Corollary. $E_{a,b}$ is bounded if and only if $|a|<pi/2$ and $|b|<pi/2$.
Now, given $a,bin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, how can we find an estimate on $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$? We could try the Lagrange multipliers approach again, similarly to what we did here.
The stationary points must satisfy
$$
bigl(f'_a(x), f'_b(y)bigr) = lambda (x, y) qquad text{for some $lambdainmathbb R$},
$$
which is equivalent to
$$
frac1{1+x^2} + frac{arctan x-a}x
= frac{f'_a(x)}{x} = lambda
= frac{f'_b(y)}{y}
=frac1{1+y^2} + frac{arctan y-b}y.
$$
Unfortunately, this time I'm not able to find a closed form solution to the system of equations
$$
left{begin{array}{l}
f_a(x)+f_b(y)=0 , \
frac{f'_a(x)}x=frac{f'_b(y)}y .
end{array}right.
$$
One can of course fall back to numerical solutions. I'm using Mathematica for that.
Here I fix the values $a=3/2$ and $b=5/4$, then I find extremal points numerically both with the built-in NMaximize
function and by solving the Lagrange multiplier system with FindRoot
. The two solutions are the same, up to machine precision. Then I plot the set $E_{a,b}$ in blue, the root locus of the Lagrange multiplier equation in orange, and the smallest fitting circle in gray.
edited Dec 11 '18 at 17:37
answered Dec 11 '18 at 15:04
FedericoFederico
5,144514
5,144514
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
|
show 14 more comments
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
1
1
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
$begingroup$
Well, that falls in the broad question of numerical optimization. I proved that the set is bounded. Therefore the problem $max_{(x,y)in E_{a,b}} x^2+y^2$ is well posed. Then there are plenty of algorithms to perform numerical maximization. Here everything is smooth, so there should be no problems with running any numerical algorithm. There cannot be a divergence, because the set is bounded!
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 18:05
1
1
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
$begingroup$
Ok, so for the $n$-dimensional version, the same statement holds. Namely, if you define $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}={f_{a_1}(x_1)+dots+f_{a_n}(x_n)=0}$, then $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is bounded if and only if $|a_i|<pi/2$ for all $i=1,dots,n$. The proof is also the same
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:33
1
1
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
$begingroup$
Once you have this condition ($|a_i|<pi/2 forall i$), you can apply again a numerical scheme to maximize $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ over $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ and it should be able to find the optimum
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:35
1
1
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
You mention the symmetry in the case $a_1=dots=a_n$. While it is true that in this case $E_{a_1,dots,a_n}$ is symmetric w.r.t. permutations of the variables, be aware that the maximum of $x_1^2+dots+x_n^2$ is not achieved when all $x_i$'s except one are zero, or when $x_1=dots=x_n$. The maximum is achieved at a point which is not particularly special from the point of view of symmetries. This is something different from your other problem
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 13 '18 at 14:38
1
1
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
$begingroup$
@Tag The set ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is equal to the projection on the $(x,y)$ plane of $E_{a,b,c}cap{z=y-x}={(x,y,z):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(z)=0}cap{z=y-x}$. So, if $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$, then $E_{a,b,c}$ is bounded and therefore slicing and projecting it gives a bounded set. Notice that in this case it is no longer an "if and only if". I'm not sure we can say that if ${(x,y):f_a(x)+f_b(y)+f_c(y-x)=0}$ is bounded then $a,b,cin(-pi/2,pi/2)$. I don't know the answer because I haven't analyzed this problem in detail. But at least the other implication is true.
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 17 '18 at 16:55
|
show 14 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3034053%2fhow-can-we-find-some-radius-of-circle-which-fully-contains-x-arctanx-axy-arc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Are you looking for the smallest circle, or the smallest one centred on $O$?
$endgroup$
– J.G.
Dec 10 '18 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I need a circle centred on $O$ (origin). And not necessarily the smallest (but the smallest will be good, of course).
$endgroup$
– Tag
Dec 10 '18 at 17:11