How do I solve for x in cotx=2 by using a scientific calculator?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the equation cot(x) = 2 using a scientific calculator. Participants explore various methods and properties of trigonometric functions related to the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to find alternative methods to calculate x, noting that tan^(-1)(1/2) is one approach. Others discuss the relationship between cotangent and tangent, suggesting that cot(x) can be expressed in terms of arctangent. Some participants provide proofs and explore the implications of these identities.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering various proofs and discussing the definitions and properties of inverse trigonometric functions. There is an ongoing exploration of why certain identities hold true under specific conditions, particularly regarding the ranges of the functions involved.

Contextual Notes

There are discussions about the definitions of inverse trigonometric functions and their angular ranges, with some participants questioning the validity of certain identities for all non-zero values of x. The conversation highlights the need for clarity regarding conventions used in defining these functions.

Cuisine123
Messages
38
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



How do I solve for x in cotx=2 by using a scientific calculator?
What do I have to enter?

Homework Equations



N/A

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that I can enter tan^-1 (1/2) to find x, but is there another way to do it on a calculator?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you need another way? If cot(x)=2 then 1/2=1/cot(x)=tan(x). The only other way to do it is to lobby the calculator companies for a cot^(-1) button.
 
There is another way:

The arccotangent of x is equal to one half pi minus the arctangent of x. The arccotangent of x only equals the arctangent of 1/x if x is greater than zero.

In short...

[tex]arccot(x)=\frac{\pi}{2}-arctan(x)[/tex]

[tex]arccot(x)=arctan(\frac{1}{x}), x>0[/tex]

I don't know why this is true, my calculus book tells me so.
 
Char. Limit said:
There is another way:

The arccotangent of x is equal to one half pi minus the arctangent of x. The arccotangent of x only equals the arctangent of 1/x if x is greater than zero.

In short...

[tex]arccot(x)=\frac{\pi}{2}-arctan(x)[/tex]

[tex]arccot(x)=arctan(\frac{1}{x}), x>0[/tex]

I don't know why this is true, my calculus book tells me so.

Draw a right triangle with an angle [itex]\theta[/itex] and let the opposite side length be x and the adjacent side be 1 such that [itex]tan\theta=x[/itex]. Now, [itex]\theta=arctan(x)[/itex] and if we find the other angle in the triangle in terms of [itex]\theta[/itex], by sum of angles in a triangle, it is [itex]\pi/2 -\theta[/itex], so [itex]tan(\pi/2-\theta)=1/x[/itex] thus [itex]arccot(x)=\pi/2-\theta=\pi/2-arctan(x)[/itex].

You can prove the second result by a similar method.

@ the OP: you don't need an [itex]cot^{-1}[/itex] function on your calculator since it's very simple to take the [itex]tan^{-1}[/itex] of the reciprocal.
 
Thanks for the proof.
 
In fact, the "co" in "cosine" is there because the function gives the sine of the COmplementary angle. Same with the other co-functions.
 
Aha thanks for that neat little info I didn't know :smile:
 
Other proofs that arccot(x) = [itex]\pi[/tex]/2 - arctan(x) and arccot(x) = arctan(1/x):<br /> <br /> arccot(x) = [itex]\pi[/tex]/2 - arctan(x)<br /> <br /> Let x = tan(θ) = cot([itex]\pi[/itex]/2 - θ) (a trig identity)<br /> x = cot([itex]\pi[/itex]/2 - θ)<br /> arccot(x) = [itex]\pi[/itex]/2 - θ<br /> tan(θ) = x<br /> θ = arctan(x)<br /> arccot(x) = [itex]\pi[/itex]/2 - arctan(x)<br /> <br /> <br /> arccot(x) = arctan(1/x)<br /> <br /> Let θ = arccot(x)<br /> cot(θ) = x<br /> 1/cot(θ) = tan(θ) = 1/x<br /> θ = arctan(1/x)<br /> arccot(x) = arctan(1/x)[/itex][/itex]
 
Last edited:
Well the trig identity was derived from the properties of a right-triangle so your proof hasn't really changed much, other than giving someone the opportunity to realize it can be done that way too.

I'm curious as to why [tex]arccot(x)=arctan(\frac{1}{x}), x>0[/tex] as char.limit has posted. Why isn't this true for all non-zero x?
 
  • #10
Mentallic said:
Well the trig identity was derived from the properties of a right-triangle so your proof hasn't really changed much, other than giving someone the opportunity to realize it can be done that way too.

I'm curious as to why [tex]arccot(x)=arctan(\frac{1}{x}), x>0[/tex] as char.limit has posted. Why isn't this true for all non-zero x?

arctan and arccot are defined with different angular ranges. Look it up and draw a graph. They only overlap for x>0 or resulting angle between 0 and pi/2.
 
  • #11
Thanks, Dick. I didn't quite know myself.
 
  • #12
Sorry I didn't quit understand what "angular ranges" meant.
I've drawn a graph for both:

[tex]cot^{-1}x=\pi/2-tan^{-1}x[/tex]
[tex]cot^{-1}x=tan^{-1}(1/x)[/tex]

and it seems as though the first is only true for x>0 while the second is true for all x.

Please elaborate so we can settle this.
 
  • #13
Well, I believe that invtrig functions are only defined for certain angles. For example, I'm pretty sure that arcsin(x) is only defined from -pi/2 to pi/2 on the y axis. Thus, the angular range of arcsin(x) is [-pi/2,pi/2], but don't quote me on that.

Arctangent I don't know about.
 
  • #14
I've just realized there is a another common convention for defining arccot. You can also define it to take values on (-pi/2,pi/2) but you pay the price of having it be discontinuous at 0. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/InverseCotangent.html Which 'arc' identities are true depends on what convention you are using. You HAVE to say which.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K