Talk:Epicycloid

Untitled
I moved this graphic to the talk page, in case anyone thought there was still a need for it. Doctormatt 08:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be better to express the values for K in the images as fractions rather than decimals, to emphasize that they are rational, and allow one to see the significance of the denominator. Bennetto 16:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added fractional equivalents to the captions (an easy edit). Doctormatt 17:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Poor performance on IE8
The image "EpitrochoidOn3.gif" on the top right has a real hard time rendering itself on IE8 and lags the whole page down. Firefox 3.5 doesnt have this issue. Not tested on other browsers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Episode17 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Polar Co:ordinates
It would be useful to know the equation(s) for the epicycloid given in polar co:ordinates. I don't know how to do this, but it seems a more natural way to look at it. I am trying to make some plexiglass gears with epicycloidal tooth profiles, and polar co:ordinates for the curve would make it much easier to design and print a template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonygumbrell (talk • contribs) 17:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Can the epicycle/"drawing circle" be bigger than fixed circle?
I see no reason why the epicycle should be smaller than the fixed circle. The equations seem to work just fine with a smaller fixed circle and a bigger epicycle, too. However the equations section apparently assumes the fixed circle is always bigger than the epicycle.

It says: "If the smaller circle has radius r, and the larger circle has radius R [...]" But I think it should be changed to "If the epicycle has radius r, and the fixed circle has radius R [...]"

I could have edited this by myself but since I am no expert on this topic (and I since I am new to editing Wikipedia in general) I'd like somebody to verify this first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fr0schmann (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

I’d like to add a section
Hello, I’m new to Wikipedia, but I am very fluent in the field of mathematics. I’d like to add a section to this article providing the metric properties of an epicycle (arc length, area, etc.). Again, though, I’m new to editing on Wikipedia, so I want to discuss this decision with other people, first.

First and foremost, I’d like to understand the verification requirements of Wikipedia. I’ve seen some articles where a statement is made, a full proof is provided, but there are no citations. In other articles, though, each and every step of a proof are cited.

I think adding a metric properties section would be an excellent addition to this article, as despite being a somewhat complex curve, it’s metric properties are surprisingly simple. For example, for any epicycle formed by one circle rolling around the entire circumference of another circle one time, the total arc length will be equal to 4 times the sum of both circles’ diameters.

If someone would be comfortable with helping me out with this, or with telling me what I can and cannot do when addidng a section, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much! Math Machine 4 (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I refered to it as an epicycle, but I meant to say epicycloid. The epicycle refers to the circle who’s center moves, the epicycloid refers to the shape formed by tracing one point on the epicycle’s circumference. I hope you can understand my confusion and it does not influence your opinion of me or my credibility. Math Machine 4 (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2018 (UTC)