Prove Sin(x) Unique for Every Positive Integer

  • Thread starter Thread starter cragar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the sine function, evaluated at positive integer values, yields distinct results. Participants explore the uniqueness of sin(x) for different positive integers, citing examples such as sin(3) and sin(5).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants consider using infinite series, Euler's formula, and proof by contradiction. They discuss the implications of assuming sin(x) = sin(y) for distinct positive integers and the necessity of integer multiples of pi in their reasoning.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the implications of sin(x) = sin(y) and how it relates to the rationality of pi. There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions and definitions involved in the proof, with various interpretations being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the constraints of working with positive integers and the implications of integer multiples of pi in their arguments. There is a recognition of the need to clarify the conditions under which sine values may repeat.

cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Prove that the sin(x), where x is a positive integer. For every value of x has a distinct unique number.
For example sin(3)≠sin(5)

The Attempt at a Solution


I thought about using the infinite series for sin(x), or Euler's formula , Or maybe since an integer doesn't divide into pi so therefore it won't repeat the cycle.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cragar said:

Homework Statement


Prove that the sin(x), where x is a positive integer. For every value of x has a distinct unique number.
For example sin(3)≠sin(5)

The Attempt at a Solution


I thought about using the infinite series for sin(x), or Euler's formula , Or maybe since an integer doesn't divide into pi so therefore it won't repeat the cycle.

Try a proof by contradiction. Can you think about what [itex]\sin x = \sin y[/itex] would imply about the relationship between [itex]x[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex]? Now let [itex]x[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] represent distinct positive integers and arrive at a contradiction.
 
thanks for the help, if we assumed sin(x)=sin(y) and they were positive integers, we would need one of them to be an integer multiple of pi, because we would need another value to eventually come back around to one of the other values. But this will never happen because we are dealing with integers.
 
cragar said:
thanks for the help, if we assumed sin(x)=sin(y) and they were positive integers, we would need one of them to be an integer multiple of pi, because we would need another value to eventually come back around to one of the other values. But this will never happen because we are dealing with integers.

It's the difference between them that has to be an integer multiple of [itex]2\pi[/itex].

I was thinking along the lines of:

[tex]\sin x = \sin y \Rightarrow x = y + 2n{\pi}, n \in \mathbb{Z}[/tex]

Without loss of generality we may assume [itex]x > y[/itex]:

[tex](x > y) \vee (x,y \in \mathbb{Z^+}) \Rightarrow n > 0[/tex]

Hence,

[tex]\pi = \frac{x-y}{2n} \Rightarrow \pi \in \mathbb{Q}[/tex]

Contradiction.
 
Last edited:
Curious3141 said:
It's the difference between them that has to be an integer multiple of [itex]2\pi[/itex].

I was thinking along the lines of:

[tex]\sin x = \sin y \Rightarrow x = y + 2n{\pi}, n \in \mathbb{Z}[/tex]

Without loss of generality we may assume [itex]x > y[/itex]:

[tex](x > y) \vee (x,y \in \mathbb{Z^+}) \Rightarrow n > 0[/tex]

Hence,

[tex]\pi = \frac{x-y}{2n} \Rightarrow \pi \in \mathbb{Q}[/tex]

Contradiction.

sin(x)=sin(y) does not imply x=y+2npi. sin(pi/2-1/2)=sin(pi/2+1/2). The arguments of the sin don't differ by a multiple of 2pi.
 
Dick said:
sin(x)=sin(y) does not imply x=y+2npi. sin(pi/2-1/2)=sin(pi/2+1/2). The arguments of the sin don't differ by a multiple of 2pi.

Oops. Thanks for spotting that! :redface:

The first line of the proof can be easily amended to:

[itex]\sin x = \sin y \Rightarrow x = y + 2n{\pi}, n \in \mathbb{Z}[/itex] OR [itex]x+y = (2k+1)\pi, k \in \mathbb{Z}[/itex]

With the same conclusion that [itex]\pi[/itex] is rational following from either case.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K