MHB Reviewing Phasors: When to Add +/- 180 in $\tan^{-1}$?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dethrone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Phasors
AI Thread Summary
When converting rectangular coordinates to polar form in circuit analysis, the use of the inverse tangent function can lead to confusion, particularly when dealing with negative values. Adding or subtracting 180 degrees is not universally applicable, as demonstrated by the example of the complex number -3 + 1j, where the correct angle requires adding 90 degrees instead. The discussion highlights the importance of using the atan2 function, which correctly accounts for the signs of both components to yield the appropriate angle in all quadrants. A discrepancy in a textbook example further emphasizes the need for careful calculations. Understanding these nuances is crucial for accurate phasor analysis in electrical engineering.
Dethrone
Messages
716
Reaction score
0
I'm reviewing phasors (in circuits) and my prof wrote that if you're taking the inverse tangent, $\tan^{-1}{\frac{b}{a}}$ where $a$ is negative, you need to add $+/- 180$. Now I understand that the inverse tangent is defined between $-\pi/2$ to $\pi/2$ for invertibility, etc, but adding or subtracting 180 doesn't always work?

For example, consider $-3+1j$, where (j is the imaginary unit), then the angle is easily seen to be $108.4$ degrees. Using a calculator, $\tan^{-1}(-1/3)=-18.4$ degrees, but no scalar multiply of $180$ will bring me to $108.4$. (I have to add $90$ degrees) So does that imply that my prof's method doesn't generally work?

This is not a problem when you do conversions by hand, but it's been recommended to use the calculator to convert from rectangular to polar, so it would be crucial to know whether or not to add 90, 180, etc.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You keep editing your post...every time I go to reply, it has changed...:D

For the complex number:

$$z=-1+3j$$

We then find (bearing in mind we are in quadrant II):

$$\arg(z)=\pi-\arctan\left(3\right)\approx108.4^{\circ}$$

You simply mixed up the coordinates in the Argand plane. :D

edit: You changed your post again...:(
 
Sorry, LOL, I'm way too tired at the moment (I kept doing $\tan^{-1}\frac{a}{b}$ instead of $\tan^{-1}\frac{b}{a}$which further added to my confusion), but mainly I was trying to find a simple example that matched the question in the book until i realized the book was wrong - so my confusion in the first place was nonsense.

$-1103.55+j353.5$
In polar coordinates:
$1158.79 \angle 162.2$, but the book gets $1158.79\angle 107.76$

The book answer is wrong?

(I normally use the quadrant argument, but when I get rational functions in rectangular form and stick it into a calculator, I can't really distill which quadrant it belongs to, so I decide to stick with adding 180 degrees. I could rationalize it the denominator, but there isn't enough time on the exam :D)
 
Last edited:
Just busting your chops, my friend...I have days where nothing I post is right the first time...:D

W|A agrees with you:

View attachment 4216
 

Attachments

  • ridopolar.png
    ridopolar.png
    2.5 KB · Views: 127
You basically need atan2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (scroll down to "definition and computation" to see how it is defined, watch out for the order of the arguments). This will make sure to return the right angle in every case, assuming that zero radians is along the positive real axis and you measure counterclockwise.
 
Haha, thanks so much, Mark! :D

EDIT: ...and Bacterius! I never knew about atan2 (pretty cool stuff!), sadly the calculator mandated by my department lacks that function.
EDIT2: Yes! atan2 defined piece-wisely is what I need. (Cool)
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...
Back
Top