Are Secant and Trigonometric Identities Confusing in Calculus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_ArtofScience
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Trigonometry
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the confusion surrounding secant and trigonometric identities in Calculus, particularly in the context of two specific proofs. The first proof involves demonstrating that secant²(4θ)/2 - secant²(4θ) equals secant(8θ), while the second proof aims to show that tan(x)/(1-cot(x)) + cot(x)/(1-tan(x)) equals sec(x)csc(x) + 1. Participants highlight the need for clearer notation and the use of double angle or half angle identities to simplify these expressions effectively.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of trigonometric identities, specifically secant and tangent functions.
  • Familiarity with sum/difference formulas in trigonometry.
  • Knowledge of double angle and half angle identities.
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills for simplifying trigonometric expressions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of secant and tangent identities in trigonometry.
  • Learn how to apply double angle and half angle identities in trigonometric proofs.
  • Practice simplifying complex trigonometric expressions using algebraic techniques.
  • Explore common pitfalls in trigonometric proofs to avoid confusion in future calculations.
USEFUL FOR

Students in Calculus I, particularly those struggling with trigonometric identities and proofs, as well as educators looking for insights into common student misconceptions in trigonometry.

The_ArtofScience
Messages
83
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm currently in cal 1 and we are doing trigonometry identities for review. I can't recall ever seeing a sum/difference formula for secant in precal

(1) Prove secant² (4θ) / 2 - secant² (4θ) = secant (8θ)
(2) Prove tan(x)/(1-cot(x)) + cot(x)/(1-tan(x)) = sec(x)csc(x) + 1

The Attempt at a Solution



(1) secant² (4θ) / 2 - secant² (4θ) = -1/2 *(sec²(4θ))

(2) tan(x)/(1-cot(x)) + cot(x)/(1-tan(x))

=[ tan(x)(1-tan(x)) + cot(x)(1-cot(x))] /(1-cot(x))(1-tan(x))

= [tan(x) - tan²(x) + cot(x) - cot²(x)]/ (1-tan(x)-cot(x)+cot(x)tan(x))

= sin(x)/cos(x) - sin²(x)/cos²(x) + cos(x)/sin(x) - cos²(x)/sin²(x) / 2-tan(x)-cot(x)

= [sin3(x)cos(x)-sin4(x) +cos3(x)sin(x)-cos4(x)]/cos²(x)sin²(x)/ 2-tan(x)-cot(x)

= [sin3(x)cos(x) + cos3(x)sin(x) - (sin4(x) + cos4(x))]/cos²(x)sin²(x)/ 2-tan(x)-cot(x)

= [sin(x)cos(x)[sin2(x)+cos2(x)] -1]/cos²(x)sin²(x)/ 2-tan(x)-cot(x)

= sin(x)cos(x) -1 / cos²(x)sin²(x)(2-sin(x)/cos(x)-cos(x)/sin(x))

= sin(x)cos(x) -1/ 2cos²(x)sin²(x) - sin3(x)cos(x) -cos3(x)sin(x)

= sin(x)cos(x) -1/ 2cos²(x)sin²(x) - sin(x)cos(x)(sin²(x) + cos²(x))

= sin(x)cos(x) -1 /sin(x)cos(x)(2sin(x)cos(x)-1)

= 1/2*csc(x)sec(x) This is where I'm stuck I can't find a way for it to look like what is trying to be proven here
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
(1) I think you have to combine secant² (4θ) / 2 - secant² (4θ) into one fraction by making it (secant² (4θ) - 2secant² (4θ) ) / 2 then using double angle or half angle identity.

Your first line for (2) doesn't comply with me. It's like you multiplied by (1-tan(x)) for the first term and your (1-cot(x)) on its denominator disappeared.
 
war485 said:
(1) I think you have to combine secant² (4θ) / 2 - secant² (4θ) into one fraction by making it (secant² (4θ) - 2secant² (4θ) ) / 2 then using double angle or half angle identity.

Your first line for (2) doesn't comply with me. It's like you multiplied by (1-tan(x)) for the first term and your (1-cot(x)) on its denominator disappeared.

Hmmm...I think I'll just figure this out on my own. There should have been more brackets in the post to lessen the confusion but I doubt anyone is going to volunteer to solve it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K