Proof using hyperbolic trig functions and complex variables

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the equation tan(2x) = -cos(b) / sinh(a) using hyperbolic trig functions and complex variables. The user presents their derivation involving the definitions of tan and sinh, as well as the exponential form of complex numbers. They express frustration over potentially missing a theoretical piece that could simplify the proof. Suggestions are made to factor expressions and focus on calculating the real part, as the left side of the equation is real. The overall sentiment indicates a struggle with the complexity of the problem while seeking clarity on the proof.
Nerd2567
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
1. Given, x + yi = tan^-1 ((exp(a + bi)). Prove that tan(2x) = -cos(b) / sinh(a)

Homework Equations

I have derived.
tan(x + yi) = i*tan(x)*tanh(y) / 1 - i*tan(x)*tanh(y)

tan(2x) = 2tanx / 1 - tan^2 (x)

Exp(a+bi) = exp(a) *(cos(b) + i*sin(b))[/B]3. My attempt:
By definition sinha = (exp(a) - exp (-a)) / 2

Let x + yi = z

tanz = exp(a + bi) = exp(a) * exp(bi)
hence; exp(a) = tan(z) / exp(bi)
exp(-a) = exp(bi) /tan(z)
therefore; exp(a) - exp(-a) = (tan(z) / exp(bi) ) * ( exp(bi) / tan(z) )
simplifying; exp(a) - exp(-a) = (tan^2(z) - exp(2bi)) / (exp(bi) * tan(z))
hence, sinh (a) = (exp(a) - exp(-a))/ 2 = (tan^2(z) - exp(2bi)) / 2(exp(bi) * tan(z))

Now am going to find -cos(b) --------

tanz = exp(a) * (cos(b) + isin(b))
cos(b) = (tan(z) / exp(a)) - isin(b)
-cos(b) = isin(b) - (tan(z) / exp(a))
simplifying;
-cos(b) = ( iexp(a)*sin(b) - tan(z) ) / exp(a)

therefore;
-cos(b) / sinh (a) =((( 2iexp(a + bi) * sin(b) tan(z) - 2exp(bi) * tan^2 (z) ))) / (( exp(a) tan^2(z) - exp(a +2bi) ))

this is pretty much my best attempt...:'( I must be missing theory please help...I will really appreciate it!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can factor out several things which makes the expression shorter.
Also, the left side is real, so calculating the real part should be sufficient.
 
mfb said:
You can factor out several things which makes the expression shorter.
Also, the left side is real, so calculating the real part should be sufficient.
Perhaps, but I'd seem a bit illogical to do that since they said the right hand side should be tan(2x)...sighz the problem is either rather difficult or am missing a simple piece of theory to make it a 5 line proof (often the case) .
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K