B Sine Multiplication

Vilhjalmur Haldorson
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Sine Multiplication
Hi, I am doing a sine quation which has multiple numbers along the line.I was wondering when multiplying the equation out do I multiply all the numbers then sin function that number or do I sin the number beside the sine function and then multiply it out?
The equation is: sin h bt/ bt.
I also have another question, if t does not equal 1 and an equation requires that it equals one then can I use 0.66 instead of one or is the equation set for when t=1 and cannot be used with t=0.66?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Lets start at the beginning:

Is this something that has to do with using Laplace transforms?

$$f(t)=\sinh(bt)=\frac{e^{bt}-e^{-bt}}{2}$$

or is your expression $$\frac{\sinh(bt)}{bt}$$ or $$\frac{\sin(hbt)}{bt}$$ ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
Vilhjalmur Haldorson said:
Hi, I am doing a sine quation which has multiple numbers along the line.I was wondering when multiplying the equation out do I multiply all the numbers then sin function that number or do I sin the number beside the sine function and then multiply it out?
What does "multiple numbers along the line" mean? Also, your question would be more comprehensible if you provided an example of what you're talking about.
Vilhjalmur Haldorson said:
The equation is: sin h bt/ bt.
First, this is not an equation -- an equation expresses the equality of two expressions (or possibly more) and has an = symbol between the expressions.
Second, what you have written is too ambiguous for us to even tell what it's supposed to represent.
Vilhjalmur Haldorson said:
I also have another question, if t does not equal 1 and an equation requires that it equals one then can I use 0.66 instead of one or is the equation set for when t=1 and cannot be used with t=0.66?
What equation? Why does some "equation" require that t = 1?

You're going to have to be a lot clearer in your questions if you want reasonable replies.
 
  • Like
Likes mcastillo356 and FactChecker
Sorry Im doing a continuous uniform distribution from the beta distribution using Mx= sinh(bt)/bt but Ive already fugured it out.It doesnt matter they both come out the same way.But that is not always the case. , and t=1 in a hypoerbola , but t=0.66 for me . Im doing the alpha decay of the carbon 8 to Nitrogen and C13. but eh stable alpha soes not seem to equate out.SO I am doing the uniform distribution from the beta distribution and then the continuance of the beta distribition at (x-a)^a-1(b-x)^B-1 / B(a,B) transpose (b-a)^a+B+t , a< x< b, a>0,,B > 0 and then normally distribute it, but Ive been thinking mybe I should do a student t instead first.
 
Vilhjalmur Haldorson said:
Im doing the alpha decay of the carbon 8 to Nitrogen and C13.
Carbon-8 does not decay by ##\alpha##-emission. It decays by double proton emission to beryllium-6.
 
That's great that you figured it out.

In the future, please learn to use latex to enter your math expressions. We have a simple guide. See my signature below for the link to Mathjax/latex help.
 
  • Like
Likes mcastillo356
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