Inverse trigonometric equation

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
21 replies · 4K views
utkarshakash
Gold Member
Messages
852
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


Solve

[itex]cot^{-1} x - cot^{-1} (n^2 - x+1)=cot^-1(n-1)[/itex]

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


I can write the above equation as θ+α=β where the symbols represent the respective inverse functions. Now I take tan of both sides. Simplifying I get

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you asking how to solve that equation?
 
utkarshakash said:

Homework Statement


Solve

[itex]cot^{-1} x - cot^{-1} (n^2 - x+1)=cot^-1(n-1)[/itex]

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


I can write the above equation as θ+α=β where the symbols represent the respective inverse functions. Now I take tan of both sides. Simplifying I get

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]
I get nearly the same thing:

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = 1+x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]
 
MrWarlock616 said:
Are you asking how to solve that equation?

Yes I have to find the value of x
 
SammyS said:
I get nearly the same thing:

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = 1+x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]

But what should be the next step?
 
SammyS said:
Multiply each side out.

Get everything to the left side.

You have a quadratic equation in x.

But its discriminant is way too big!
 
SammyS said:
Too big in what sense ?

What do you get for the discriminant ?

How are you getting that 'extra' 1 in the RHS. OK I'm only posting what I got from my answer i.e. without that '1'.

D=[itex]n^4+6n^2-8n+2[/itex]
 
utkarshakash said:
How are you getting that 'extra' 1 in the RHS. OK I'm only posting what I got from my answer i.e. without that '1'.
...]
Wow! I showed that "extra" 1 way back in post #3. Now you mention it?

I got it because,

[itex]\displaystyle \left(1+\frac{1}{x(n^2-x+1)}\right)x(n^2-x+1)=x(n^2-x+1)+1\ .[/itex]

How did you not get it?
 
SammyS said:
Wow! I showed that "extra" 1 way back in post #3. Now you mention it?

I got it because,

[itex]\displaystyle \left(1+\frac{1}{x(n^2-x+1)}\right)x(n^2-x+1)=x(n^2-x+1)+1\ .[/itex]

How did you not get it?

Hey there is a much better solution than this. Instead of taking tan if I take cot of both sides I get a very simple result and here's it

[itex]x= \dfrac{n(n+1)}{2}[/itex]

And yes you said right. There was a calculation error in my solution. It should have that extra 1
 
utkarshakash said:
Hey there is a much better solution than this. Instead of taking tan if I take cot of both sides I get a very simple result and here's it

[itex]x= \dfrac{n(n+1)}{2}[/itex]
...

That is interesting. I'll have to take a look at it.
 
SammyS said:
I still get a quadratic equation in x, so that can't be the solution.

[itex]\displaystyle \cot(A+B)=\frac{\cot(A)\,\cot(B)-1}{\cot(A)+\cot(B)}[/itex]

OMG I made the silliest mistake ever. :bugeye: Instead of taking cot of both sides I just removed the 'inverse thing' and simply calculated the value of x from there. OK sticking to my previous solution I take tan of both sides and get the same thing what you got(with that extra 1) and get the discriminant as

[itex]-4n^3+6n^2-8n+9[/itex]
 
utkarshakash said:
OMG I made the silliest mistake ever. :bugeye: Instead of taking cot of both sides I just removed the 'inverse thing' and simply calculated the value of x from there. OK sticking to my previous solution I take tan of both sides and get the same thing what you got(with that extra 1) and get the discriminant as

[itex]-4n^3+6n^2-8n+9[/itex]
What I got for a discriminant was

[itex]n^4+6n^2-8n+9\ .[/itex]

I just rechecked it using WolframAlpha on

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = 1+x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]

and it confirmed my result.
 
SammyS said:
What I got for a discriminant was

[itex]n^4+6n^2-8n+9\ .[/itex]

I just rechecked it using WolframAlpha on

[itex](n^2+1-2x)(n-1) = 1+x(n^2-x+1)[/itex]

and it confirmed my result.

OK so what should I do after getting discriminant?
 
haruspex said:
Nothing special. It's just a quadratic equation in x; solve it with the usual formula. If it's messy, it's messy.

You can't simply say that :cry:I cannot get rid of that square root. Please help me. Its not even a perfect square. Should I leave it this way?
 
utkarshakash said:
You can't simply say that :cry:I cannot get rid of that square root. Please help me. Its not even a perfect square. Should I leave it this way?
If n=0, then the discriminant is a perfect square. I found no other cases. Also, the discriminant is positive for all values of n.

So as haruspex said, it's a messy result.
 
SammyS said:
If n=0, then the discriminant is a perfect square. I found no other cases. Also, the discriminant is positive for all values of n.

So as haruspex said, it's a messy result.

OK so you want me to continue with that square root.
 
SammyS said:
That's about all there is to do, but you can't do much simplifying.

OK Thanks!