Solve for x: 0 < x < 2(pie) sin(x)+2sin(x)cos(x)=0

  • Thread starter Thread starter seanistic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Trig
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the equation \(0 < x < 2\pi\) for \(x\) in the context of trigonometric functions, specifically focusing on the equation \( \sin(x) + 2\sin(x)\cos(x) = 0\). Participants are exploring the implications of using identities and the structure of the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the possibility of solving the equation by factoring out \(\sin(x)\) and question the necessity of using trigonometric identities. There is confusion regarding the equivalence of expressions involving \(\sin(x)\) and \(\cos(x)\) and the implications for solving the equation.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the relationship between the terms in the equation, with some participants clarifying that the order of multiplication does not affect the outcome. Guidance has been offered regarding factoring and finding roots, but no consensus has been reached on the necessity of identities for solving the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem is situated within sections of their coursework that focus on simple trigonometric equations and the use of identities, leading to discussions about the appropriateness of the problem's complexity.

seanistic
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
solve for x, if 0< x < 2(pie)

sin(x)+2sin(x)cos(x)=0

Correct me if I am wrong but you can only solve this if the equation consists of all sin(x) or all cos(x). I realize that 2sinAcosA = sin2A but I am in section 1 which is "simple trigonometric equations" and section 2 is "using identities in trigonometric equations" so I don't see why they would put a problem that uses identities in sections 1.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you need to use identities? Use the distributive law; in other words, pull the sin(x) out.
 
well I thought about that and I came up with sinx(1+2cosx) which I don't think is right because then I would get sinx+2cosxsinx.
 
when you have sinx(1+2cosx)=0 all you have to do is find the roots of the equation when sinx=0 and 1+2cosx=0
 
I understand the part about finding the roots but I am confused that sinx+2sinxcosx = sinx(1+2cosx) because when I distribute i get sinx+2cosxsinx. is sinx+2cosxsinx the same as sinx+2sinxcosx?also I thought in order to solve for x you had to have the same trig function. Right now the equation would be equivilant to x+2xy=0 trying to solve for x. that's why I thought you had to have the indentity in order to have only one variable.

I know I am slow at this but in my defense I am teaching myself out of "Trigonometry - 5th edition by Charles P. Mckeague and Mark D. Turner".
 
Last edited:
Yes, it is, since real number (and real function) multiplication is a commutative operation.
 
seanistic said:
is sinx+2cosxsinx the same as sinx+2sinxcosx?

Of course it is!

sin(x)(2+cos(x)) = 0
=> sin(x) = 0, cos(x) +0.5 = 0
 
yes sinx+2sinxcosx = sinx+2cosxsinx as long as you have the 2, cosx, and sinx being multiplied, it doesn't matter in what order you have them being multiplied, ex. sinx*cosx*2 = 2*cosx*sinx = cosx*2*sinx = ...
 
ok, that makes sense now. I was under the impression that the 2 stayed with its function, perhaps I was thinking of cos2x or sin2x?
 
  • #10
probably, that's why soemtiems it helps to write sinx,cosx out as sin(x), cos(x)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K