MHB Equation involving the inverse tangent function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equation $\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}=\dfrac{\pi}{2}- \arctan{x}$ for all $x>0$. The user initially equates $\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}$ with $\arccot{x}$ and explores the relationships between these functions. They confirm that $\arctan{x} + \arccot{x} = \dfrac{\pi}{2}$ holds true for all real numbers, but encounter confusion when combining the two equations. A geometric interpretation using a right triangle illustrates that the angles $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are complementary, reinforcing the relationship between the inverse tangent and cotangent functions. The conclusion emphasizes that for $x>0$, the two functions are indeed complementary angles.
karseme
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I need to prove that:

$ \arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}=\dfrac{\pi}{2}- \arctan{x}, \forall x>0$.

Now, I assumed $\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}=\arccot{x}$. So, I've tried to do this:

$\cot{y}=x \implies y=arccot{x} \\ \tan{y}=\dfrac{1}{\cot{y}}=\dfrac{1}{x} \implies y=\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}} \\ \implies \arccot{x}=\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}$. I've tried to put in some numbers and it seems that it workes for every real number.

Also, $\tan{(\dfrac{\pi}{2}-y)}=\cot{y}=x \implies \dfrac{\pi}{2}-y=\arctan{x} \land y=\arccot{x} \\ \implies \arctan{x}+\arccot{x}=\dfrac{\pi}{2}$, which also works for every real number. But, why is it then when you plug in $\arccot{x}=\arctan{\dfrac{1}{x}}$ in the second equation, it doesn't work for every x. But, the first equation and the second equation work for every real number but their combination doesn't. I know that my approach wasn't that good anyway, but I didn't know what else to do to prove this.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
For $x>0$, $\arctan(x)$ and $\arctan\left(\frac1x\right)$ are complementary angles.
 
Hi karseme! ;)

Consider the following right triangle:
\begin{tikzpicture}[font=\large]
\draw[ultra thick, blue]
(0,0) node[above right,xshift=10] {$\alpha$} -- node[below] {$1$}
(4,0) -- node
{$x$}
(4,3) node[below left,yshift=-6] {$\beta$} -- cycle;
\draw[blue] (4,0) rectangle +(-0.3,0.3);
\end{tikzpicture}

From the definition of $\tan$ we have $\tan\alpha=\frac x 1$ and $\tan\beta=\frac 1 x$.
From the angle sum of a triangle we know that $\alpha + \beta=\frac\pi 2$.
Therefore $\arctan x + \arctan \frac 1x = \frac\pi 2$. :cool:
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top