Proving the Identity for cosh Using Exponential Function Properties

  • Thread starter Thread starter aaaa202
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the identity for cosh(x) using properties of exponential functions. The original poster seeks to demonstrate that cosh(x) = 1 implies x = 0, while adhering to specific constraints regarding the use of definitions and properties of the exponential function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the definition of the exponential function and its inequalities. There is a focus on proving that exp(-x) > 1 - x without using calculus, leading to discussions about alternative methods of proof.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing insights and clarifying their understanding of the constraints. Some have suggested using known inequalities of the exponential function, while others express the need to find a proof method that aligns with the course's focus on rigorous analysis without calculus.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of an analysis course that has not yet introduced calculus, which influences their approach to the problem. There is a specific emphasis on using the properties of limits and continuity in their reasoning.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
Show that cosh(x) = 1 => x = 0

I am only allowed to use the definition of cosh, the algebraic rules for the exponential function, that exp(x2)>exp(x1) for x2 > x1, and the fact that we have defined it with the requirement:

exp(x) ≥ 1 + x

The exp(x) term of course is not trouble.

What I lack prooving is that:
exp(x) > 1 - x

Any ideas how I might approach it? I don't need answers, just hints
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If x > 0, then 2x > 0 so 1 + x > 1 + x - 2x.

If x < 0, then it's not true (exp goes to 0 while 1 - x goes to infinity for [itex]x \to -\infty[/itex]).
 
oh sorry I can see I made a fatal error.
I meant i need to show:
exp(-x) > 1 - x
 
aaaa202 said:
oh sorry I can see I made a fatal error.
I meant i need to show:
exp(-x) > 1 - x
A quick sketch of the graphs of y = e-x and y = 1 - x shows that e-x ≥ 1 - x for all real x, and that we get equality at only one value of x.

Assuming you can use techniques of calculus, let f(x) = e-x - (1 - x), and find the minimum value and where it occurs.
 
I know calculus but this is an analysis course, where it has not yet been introduced. Thus I am to find another way of proving it.
 
aaaa202 said:
I know calculus but this is an analysis course, where it has not yet been introduced.
Really? Are you saying that you haven't learned differentiation, and you're in an analysis course?
aaaa202 said:
Thus I am to find another way of proving it.
 
I'm talking a rigorous analysis course where everything is built up slowly. So far we have covered continuity and the properties of limits. I know differential calculus, but I am not allowed to use it for this handout.
 
If you know that ##e^x \ge 1+x## for all ##x##, you can plug anything you want in for ##x##. In particular, you can plug in ##-x##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K