MHB Ambiguity in the Arc-Tangent Function

  • Thread starter Thread starter bw0young0math
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the ambiguity in the arc-tangent function due to the tangent's periodicity of π rather than 2π. It highlights that arctan(5/-5) and arctan(-5/5) yield the same numerical result, but represent different angles in different quadrants. The confusion arises from the need to consider the signs of x and y to determine the correct quadrant for the angle. The conversation also touches on the importance of using the atan2 function in programming to accurately compute angles based on both x and y coordinates. Understanding the transformation from rectangular to polar coordinates clarifies why y is placed in the numerator when calculating the angle.
bw0young0math
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
This problem is about complex analysis.
Why arctan(5/-5) is different from arctan-1(-5/5)?
tan-1(5/-5)=3ㅠ/4 +2kㅠ
tan-1(-5/5)=-1ㅠ/4+2kㅠ (k :arbtrary integer.)

Why can't I calculate just arctan(-1)?I thought that it is related withe tangent peoriod ㅠ not 2ㅠ.
However I can't know that exactly.
Please help me...
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Re: Ambiguity in the Arc Tangent Function

You are correct in that the problem arises from the tangent function having period $\pi$ and not $2\pi$. Because of that, your calculator may not give you the correct quadrant when it computes the inverse (arctan). You have to think to yourself, "Hmm. My $x$ is positive, so I have to be in either the first or the fourth quadrant. $y$ is negative; therefore, I must be in the fourth quadrant." Actually, if you ask your calculator to compute
$$\arctan(-5/5)\quad \text{and} \quad \arctan(5/(-5)),$$
it will give you the same result both times. One of them is in error, however. Some programming languages get around this by implementing the atan2 function, which takes two arguments and returns the correct quadrant.
 
Re: Ambiguity in the Arc Tangent Function

Ackbach said:
$$\arctan(-5/5)\quad \text{and} \quad \arctan(5/(-5)),$$
it will give you the same result both times. One of them is in error, however. Some programming languages get around this by implementing the atan2 function, which takes two arguments and returns the correct quadrant.

At first, thanks for your help. :o
I understood your meaning that they have same values consequently. Right?
However, arctan(5/(-5)) can't express -ㅠ/4. Thus I can't understand why they are the same.Also,you mentioned about x, y, and quadrant.
My friend and I thought the reason arctan(5/(-5)) and arctan((-5)/5) are different as discussing x,y,and quadrant also.
However we didn't know why we put one of x and y denominator or numerator. Could you explain this?
 
Re: Ambiguity in the Arc Tangent Function

bw0young0math said:
At first, thanks for your help. :o
I understood your meaning that they have same values consequently. Right?
However, arctan(5/(-5)) can't express -ㅠ/4. Thus I can't understand why they are the same.

It's essentially an order of operations problem. As it happens, $-5/5=5/(-5)=-1$, so the argument to the arctan function is the same in both cases.

Also,you mentioned about x, y, and quadrant.
My friend and I thought the reason arctan(5/(-5)) and arctan((-5)/5) are different as discussing x,y,and quadrant also.
However we didn't know why we put one of x and y denominator or numerator. Could you explain this?

This arises when you are attempting to find the magnitude and direction of a 2D vector from its components. Equivalently, you are converting from rectangular coordinates to polar, either with real number or with the complex numbers.

The forward direction is
\begin{align*}
x&=r \cos( \theta)\\
y&=r \sin( \theta).
\end{align*}
If you divide the second of these by the first, you get
$$ \frac{y}{x}= \tan( \theta).$$
Taking the arctangent of both sides yields the usual equation
$$ \theta= \arctan \left( \frac{y}{x} \right).$$
So the reason $y$ is in the numerator, is because this is the correct transformation from rectangular coordinates to polar.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top