Mastering Archery Adjustments: Solving for B with Known Variables A, C, and D

wvguy8258
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Hi,

It seems I've forgotten more of my algebra than I thought. I am putting together a spreadsheet to help a few archers determine how to change their point of aim for up- and downhill shots. I would like to reduce/rearrange the following expression so that A and B are not found on the same side of the equality, but after 30 minutes can't seem to do it. Ideally, I would like B to be a function of A,C, and D which are known in this setting. Any help is appreciated, even more so if the steps are sketched. -Seth

tan (A) = tan (B) - (9.8*cos(A)*C)/(2*(cos(B)*D)2)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I couldn't solve for B, I could get it to the form

f(B) = C / g(B)

but not any simpler.
 
wvguy8258 said:
Hi,

It seems I've forgotten more of my algebra than I thought. I am putting together a spreadsheet to help a few archers determine how to change their point of aim for up- and downhill shots. I would like to reduce/rearrange the following expression so that A and B are not found on the same side of the equality, but after 30 minutes can't seem to do it. Ideally, I would like B to be a function of A,C, and D which are known in this setting. Any help is appreciated, even more so if the steps are sketched. -Seth

tan (A) = tan (B) - (9.8*cos(A)*C)/(2*(cos(B)*D)2)

Surprisingly this is a transcendental equation that appears to be solvable, (as long as D/cos(A) is not zero).

The solutions are:

B = (1/2)*(asin(9.8*C*(cos(A))^2/D^2+sin(A))+A)

and

B = (1/2)*(-asin(9.8*C*(cos(A))^2/D^2+sin(A))+A-pi())

You will have to determine which root makes sense in your context.

If that fails use:

C = (tan(B)-tan(A))*2*(cos(B)*D)^2/(9.8*cos(A))

and use the goalseek function of your spreadsheet to find the value of B that gives you the known value of C.
 
Last edited:
If you want a go at it yourself, try isolating cos B, while remembering that tan B = sin B / cos B = +-root(1-cos ^2B)/cos B. The sign depends on B, but you will have to take care of that yourself. This will probably end up in a quadratic in cos ^2B, which you can then solve for and after that isolate B. Depending on the domain of B, you might have to consider several cases.
 
Thanks everyone. I feel a little better now that I see solving for B was not extremely trivial. This will be very helpful.
 
Jarle said:
If you want a go at it yourself, try isolating cos B, while remembering that tan B = sin B / cos B = +-root(1-cos ^2B)/cos B. The sign depends on B, but you will have to take care of that yourself. This will probably end up in a quadratic in cos ^2B, which you can then solve for and after that isolate B. Depending on the domain of B, you might have to consider several cases.
I can confirm that the equation does end up as a quadratic in (cos(B))^2. Nice key observation that tan B can be turned into cos B form, that makes the equation solvable!

BTW wvguy, does the equation appear to work all right?
 
Last edited:
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top