When deriving the equation for an ellipse, I have seen that one of the first steps is to recognize that for a point on the ellipse defined by y=0, the two distances from Focus_1 (call it D1) and Focus_2 (call it D2) to the ellipse add up to 2*a, where 'a' is the length from the origin to the ellipse at y = 0.
Logically, as long as you preface this by stating that "If there are two foci that are equidistant from the origin..." then this makes sense.
However, I am then confused when this equivalency (D1 + D2 = 2*a) is subsequently used for the remainder of the derivation. D1 changes its value as you move around the ellipse (i.e. when you're no longer at y = 0); D2, of course, changes its value as well.
Since D1 + D2 = 2a was only determined for the condition that y=0, why can I subsequently use this relationship for different y values on this ellipse. For all I know, D1 + D2 does not equal 2*a for any other y value. It seems like a logical inconsistency.
Am I thinking about this incorrectly?
The definition of the ellipse is the set of points whose total distance from the two fixed points called foci is a constant.
Since this constant at one instance is $2a$ it has to be $2a$ for every other point on the ellipse as well.