# What is wrong with this code?

I am plotting polar curves with PolarPlot and I tried plotting a parabola with $\frac{2}{1-\cos x}$ and $\sec x$.

Obviously there are two singularities that have to be considered, $\cos x=1$ and $\cos x=0$. I dont know how to specify multiple singularities for the same function or variable. This is what I have tried so far:

PolarPlot[{2/(1 - Cos[x]), Sec[x]}, {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]},
Exclusions -> {Cos[x] == 0, 1}]

PolarPlot[{2/(1 - Cos[x]), Sec[x]}, {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]},
Exclusions -> {x == 0, 2 \[Pi], \[Pi]/2, (3 \[Pi])/2}]

PolarPlot[{2/(1 - Cos[x]), Sec[x]}, {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]},
Exclusions -> {Cos[x] == 0, Cos[x]==1}]


What is the right way to do this?

Any help appreciated. Thank you.

• You could just specify a PlotRange: i.stack.imgur.com/VvfsJ.png – user484 Nov 19 '14 at 15:07
• @RahulNarain but in your image too there are errors how can i rectify them...?? – Shobhit Nov 19 '14 at 15:11
• @RahulNarain how to put the exclusions, that would achieve the same ? – Shobhit Nov 19 '14 at 15:12

I would have expected your last form to work. Avoid the issue by putting the exclusion points {-Pi/2, 3Pi/2} at the boundaries of the iterator.

PolarPlot[{2/(1 - Cos[x]), Sec[x]},
{x, -Pi/2, 3 Pi/2},
AspectRatio -> 1,
PlotRange -> {{-2, 20}, {-10, 10}},
PlotLegends -> "Expressions"] EDIT: Supposition about behavior of Exclusions -> Automatic.

$PerformanceGoal  "Quality" From the documentation for Exclusions: "Exclusions -> Automatic is effectively equivalent to Exclusions -> True if $PerformanceGoal is 'Quality', and to Exclusions -> None otherwise. Exclusions -> True excludes all subregions where discontinuities are found in functions being plotted." For the function 2/(1 - Cos[x]) the discontinuities are easy to detect; however, the discontinuities in Sec[x] are apparently too subtle for whatever algorithm is used and are overlooked unless they are at the iterator boundaries. Presumably, the functions are evaluated at the iterator boundaries and when the singularities of Sec[x] are at the boundaries, they are discovered and excluded.

• thank u for your solution very helpful – Shobhit Nov 19 '14 at 17:42
• Why is it that if we put exclusion points at the ends the function misbehaves ? – Shobhit Nov 19 '14 at 17:43
• See edit above. – Bob Hanlon Nov 19 '14 at 20:10
• Thank you, for clearing that up. – Shobhit Nov 20 '14 at 13:34

Interestingly enough, there are no errors if you change the order of the two functions, and it doesn't seem to require any explicit exclusions:

PolarPlot[{Sec[x], 2/(1 - Cos[x])}, {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]},
PlotRange -> {{-5, 5}, {-5, 5}}] As Rahul Narain suggested, I also added a plot range.

my best effort at that plot, manually clipping the angle range:

 Show[{
PolarPlot[ 2/(1 - Cos[x]), {x, .1, 2 Pi - .1} ,
AspectRatio -> 1 , PlotStyle -> Red  ],
PolarPlot[Sec[x], {x, 0, 2 Pi} , AspectRatio -> 1 ]},
PlotRange -> {{-5, 20}, {-10, 10}}] after playing with this a bit I've concluded PolarPlot is simply badly behaved regarding Exclusion and even PlotRange options.

If we make that first range {0,2 Pi} the curve disappears all together, unless we specify some large number for PlotPoints :

 Show[{
PolarPlot[ 2/(1 - Cos[x]), {x, 0, 2 Pi} ,
AspectRatio -> 1 , PlotStyle -> Red  , PlotPoints -> 2000],
PolarPlot[Sec[x], {x, 0, 2 Pi} , AspectRatio -> 1 ]},
PlotRange -> {{-5, 20}, {-10, 10}}] The curve fills in if you make PlotPoints even larger..not a very satisfactory solution though.

The RegionFunction option allows you to parametrically define what portion of the function to plot

PolarPlot[2/(1 - Cos[x]), {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]}, AspectRatio -> 1,
PlotRange -> 30 {{-1, 1}, {-1, 1}},
RegionFunction -> Function[{x, y, \[Theta], r}, r <= 25]] 