Compound Angles Proof: Proven or Unproven?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter BOAS
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angles Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the function f(θ) = sin(kθ) and whether the statement regarding its periodicity has been proven. Participants explore the implications of a textbook claim about the function being cyclic with a period of 2π/k and the confusion surrounding its proof status.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses surprise that the periodicity of f(θ) = sin(kθ) has not been generally proven, despite it seeming intuitively true.
  • Another participant suggests that the statement is trivially obvious, presuming k is a positive integer.
  • A participant questions the contradiction in the textbook's claim that the idea is not generally proven while asserting it is valid for all values of k.
  • There is a suggestion that the context of the textbook's statement may relate to the mathematical development at the time rather than the totality of mathematical proof.
  • One participant interprets the textbook's approach as a way to encourage readers to develop conjectures and proofs themselves, highlighting a distinction between conjecture and established proof.
  • Another participant identifies the textbook's statement as an example of "Proof by Authority," where readers are asked to accept certain mathematical truths without detailed justification.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity and implications of the textbook's statements. There is no consensus on whether the periodicity of f(θ) = sin(kθ) has been proven, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of the textbook's claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the definition of k is not explicitly stated in the textbook, leading to ambiguity about its scope, which may include positive integers, fractions, and other values.

BOAS
Messages
546
Reaction score
19
Hello,

simple question.

My textbook (Bostock and Chandler - Pure Mathematics 1) says something that really surprises me.

When the same investigation is carried out on [itex]f(\theta)[/itex] [itex]\equiv[/itex] [itex]sin3\theta[/itex] we find that the function is cyclic with a period of [itex]\frac{2\pi}{3}[/itex] so that [itex]3[/itex] complete cycles occur between [itex]0[/itex] and [itex]2\pi[/itex]. It seems likely (Although it has not been generally proved) that the graph of the function [itex]f(\theta)[/itex] [itex]\equiv[/itex] [itex]sink\theta[/itex] is a sine wave with a period of [itex]\frac{2\pi}{k}[/itex] and a frequency [itex]k[/itex] times that of [itex]f(\theta)[/itex] [itex]\equiv[/itex] [itex]sin\theta[/itex]

The bolded part is what shocked me, it seems like such a trivial statement and intuitively true. My book was first published in 1978, so perhaps it is out of date.

It goes on to say;

These properties are, in fact, valid for all values of k

Which seems contradictory... So, has or has not this idea been proven true?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It is trivially obvious, why are you puzzled? What is contradictory? I presume the statement is for k a positive integer.
 
mathman said:
It is trivially obvious, why are you puzzled? What is contradictory? I presume the statement is for k a positive integer.

I mean that it seems trivial, so I was surprised that it had not been proven true. By contradictory, I mean, the book says the idea is not generally proven but goes on to say that it is true for all values of k.

It is not explicitly stated in my textbook what is meant by k, but all related questions deal with positive numbers, fractions and integers.
 
kθ = 2π, therefore θ =2π/k. As long as k is an integer, what else is needed?
 
Perhaps you're taking the context of the bolded statement to be total human mathematical development, rather than the mathematical development up to that point in the text?
 
I agree with Integrand. It sounds like the textbook authors want to make it clear that they are not providing a proof. They are distinguishing a conjecture making moment. If the text takes an investigation approach, then it probably encourages readers to do similar activities to develop conjectures and then better proofs.

The part that you say is contradictory is what I would call Proof by Authority. These are moments in textbooks where the author just asks the reader to accept the math without other justifications. This is often necessary because a proof requires advanced mathematics or may take too long. There's a lot of this in algebra texts: fractional exponents, calculating determinants, formulae of SA and volume of spheres. Typically the reader is just given these rules.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
9K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K