How Do Hyperbolic Functions Relate to Trigonometric Functions?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
44 replies · 8K views
Oblio
Messages
398
Reaction score
0
The hyperbolic functions are defined as follows:

coshz = e[tex]^{z}[/tex] + e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] /2

sinhz = e[tex]^{z}[/tex] - e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] /2

a.)Show that coshz = cos (iz). What is the corresponding relationship for sinhz?
b.)What are the derivatives of coshz and sinhz? What about their integrals?
c.)Show that cosh^2z - sin^2 =1
d.)Show that the integral of dx/sqrt[1+x^2 = arcsin x.

Hint : substitution x = sinhz.
I'd LOVE starters on showing this, we're told to assume z is real.
I get the idea that there's an imaginery aspect to hyperbolic functions, since coshz = cos(iz) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure.
Beforehand these values were sketched over a range of real values of z.
I don't know if that answers whether 'were allowed' ...
 
Correction: part a.) isn't necessary. My bad.
 
I have really no idea how to derive hyperbolic functions.
Is d/dx of cosh = -sinh?
 
Oblio said:
I have really no idea how to derive hyperbolic functions.
Is d/dx of cosh = -sinh?

No. Get the derivative of [tex]\frac{e^z + e^{-z}}{2}[/tex] with respect to z.
 
is d/dx of e^z + e^-z the same thing or not?
 
nm reading now, i know that's wrong
 
learningphysics said:
Show your steps...

e[tex]^{z}[/tex] + e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] / 2

d/dx e[tex]^{z}[/tex] = e[tex]^{z}[/tex] * d/dx (z)
z=real number, d/dx = 1

d/dx e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] = e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] * d/dx (-z)
z=real number, d/dx = -1

Denominator ^2 by quotient rule...

=e[tex]^{z}[/tex] - e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] / 4

?
 
Oblio said:
e[tex]^{z}[/tex] + e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] / 2

d/dx e[tex]^{z}[/tex] = e[tex]^{z}[/tex] * d/dx (z)
z=real number, d/dx = 1

d/dx e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] = e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] * d/dx (-z)
z=real number, d/dx = -1

Denominator ^2 by quotient rule...

=e[tex]^{z}[/tex] - e[tex]^{-z}[/tex] / 4

?

just do d/dz...

it's just (1/2)(e^z + e^-z)

taking d/dz you get [tex]\frac{1}{2}(\frac{d}{dz}e^z + \frac{d}{dz}e^{-z})[/tex]

so the answer is just (e^z - e^-z)/2

if you do it using the quotient rule... you need to do derivative of the numerator by the denominator, minus the numerator*deriavative of the denominator divided by the denominator squared so...

[tex]\frac{(e^z - e^{-z})2 - (e^z + e^{-z})(0)}{2^2}[/tex]

and you get the same result.
 
I don't know the rule of putting a half there...
 
Oblio said:
I don't know the rule of putting a half there...

It's just taking out the constant.

if z = A*y

then taking the derivative of both sides with respect to x...

dz/dx = A*(dy/dx)

For example... the derivative of 5e^(2x) = 5*d/dx(e^(2x)) = 5*2e^(2x) = 10e^(2x)
 
alrighty, i think i get it.
basically what i get is that d/dx of cosh is sinh and vice versa right?
 
I forget integrating quotients.. and e...
 
all i have left to do is prove that arcsinhx = integral dx 1/ sqrt[1+x^2] and I can't figure this out...
 
Oblio said:
all i have left to do is prove that arcsinhx = integral dx 1/ sqrt[1+x^2] and I can't figure this out...

did you do the substitution x = sinhz ?
 
i may have gotten somewhere...

can you explain why e^2x + e^-2x cancel out?
 
but here its in a square root and added to one
 
lol my bad.
for convenience on here i didnt match letters to the actual letters, and when you said c i looked at the wrong one.

i figured it out though, when you directed me to the right one with your last comment.

cosh^2 = 1 + sinh^2

integral dx 1/sqrt[cosh^2
=integral dx 1/cosh..

now I know the integra of cosh is sinh, but do i have to do something funky since its a quotient?
 
It seems wrong that I can say
the integral of 1/cosh is 1/sinh
 
learningphysics said:
Are you sure you have the question posted correctly? I think the question should be to prove that integral equals arcsinhx

thats what i meant, sorry didnt notice that typo.
I should have it right in my last posts...