I recently asked a question on this forum regarding why 3 points guaranteed the presence or absence of a unique equation representing a specific circle.
(link here What do "3 different points" have to do with linear dependence in determining a unique circle?)
Shortly after this, I came across a question in my book that provided a picture of 4 red dots (image below) and asked, "How many ellipses do these 4 red points define". Having read the comments on my post with the circle, I thought that this was fairly straight forward.
I chose " 1 ".
This was wrong. The answer was infinite. This caught me as surprising as I didn't think of the equations for a circle and an ellipse as differing by much beyond a scaling factor for each quadratic term.
I know that the general equation for an ellipse is as follows:
$$\left(\frac{x-h}a\right)^2 + \left(\frac{y-k}b\right)^2 = 1$$
The only thing I can think of is that because of the added scaling factors, there are now technically two additional unknowns (for a total of 4 different unknowns... h, a, k, and b), and therefore I need 4 points to specify an unique ellipse.
However, I thought to myself again, even if the ellipse is not centered at the origin, if all 4 given points happened to coincide with the intersection between the major axis and the ellipse and the minor axis and the ellipse, then certainly that would specify an unique ellipse.
If this is true, then why does the arrangement of the points matter in determining whether or not an unique ellipse is specified?
Visual explanations would be greatly appreciated!