Re: Graphics << Implicit vs ContourPlot
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg122757] Re: Graphics << Implicit vs ContourPlot
- From: Patrick Scheibe <pscheibe at trm.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 06:49:39 -0500 (EST)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- References: <201111091124.GAA11084@smc.vnet.net>
Ahh, and when you want no ticks on the axes, then say Ticks->False
Cheers
Patrick
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 06:24 -0500, John Accardi wrote:
> Goal: Show students a plot of both an ellipse with x axis as ellipse's
> transverse axis
> and the same ellipse in an x'y' coordinate plane that is rotated some angle
> with respect the the original xy coordinate plane. (All in one plot)
>
> I used:
>
> << Graphics`ImplicitPlot`; ImplicitPlot[{7 x^2 - 6 Sqrt[3] x y +
> 13 y^2 - 16 == 0, ((x^2)/2^2) + ((y^2)/2^2) == 1, y == x,
> y == -x}, {x, -3, 3}, AspectRatio -> 1.25]
>
> which works well but I had to hard fix the axis of rotation at 45 degrees
> and plot it (y == x and y == -x). I also get an obsolete warning and
> the suggestion to use the new ContourPlot for this in the future:
>
> General::obspkg: "\!\(\"Graphics`ImplicitPlot`\"\) is now obsolete.
> The legacy version being loaded may conflict with current Mathematica
> functionality. See the Compatibility Guide for updating information."
>
> So I try to accomplish the same graph with ContourPlot:
>
> ContourPlot[{7 x^2 - 6 Sqrt[3] x y + 13 y^2 - 16 ==
> 0, ((x^2)/2^2) + ((y^2)/2^2) == 1, y == x, y == -x, y == 0,
> x == 0}, {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3}, AspectRatio -> 1.25]
>
> which gets me close but I have lost traditional plotting of the xy axes
> (no tick marks). Instead I get ContourPlots boxed style coordinate system.
>
> Question: How can I get my old style axes back in the context of
> ContourPlot?
>
> Thank you for any insights.
>
- References:
- Graphics << Implicit vs ContourPlot
- From: John Accardi <johnaccardi@comcast.net>
- Graphics << Implicit vs ContourPlot