Find a root for this expression:

  • Thread starter Thread starter MaxwellPhill
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expression Root
MaxwellPhill
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
cos(x)+cos(ix)+cos(x*i^3/2)+cos(x*i^1/2)=0 for x

I have spent a lot of time finding an analytic root to this equation without success. An analytic root may not exist. I don't know. It is roughly equal to (8facorial)^(1/8)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't think there is an anaylitical solution and I am not sure that there even is a root.

x = 0 is closer than your x = 3.764350600, but that's only taken it down to 4 rather than 8.0003108.
 
Hmm..I ust realized for the expression above the root must be complex of the form i^1/4.

Trig functions of the form cosx+cosy =0 can be solved because of the product formula:

cos(x)+cox(y)=2*(cos((x+y)/2))*(cos((x-y)/2)))

but is there such a formula for cos(x)+cos(y)+cos(z) ?
 
I did some 3D Plots in mathematica to get a rough idea where a root might be and then used the FindRoot function and got that 1.4405686011239758 - 3.477840254362339i is approximatly a root.

I don't think there is any simplification like you want.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top