Solving Unsolved Trig Identity: sum[0 to x](sin(x))=180 * sin(x/2)^2 + sin(x)/2

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter crash_matrix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity Interesting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a proposed trigonometric identity related to the summation of sine functions. Participants explore the identity expressed as sum[0 to x](sin(x))=180 * sin(x/2)^2 + sin(x)/2, where x is in degrees. The context includes attempts to find simpler summation techniques for inverse kinematics and the exploration of potential proofs or existing identities that relate to this formulation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a conjectured identity involving the summation of sine functions and seeks to understand its validity or relation to known identities.
  • Another participant suggests clarifying the notation to avoid confusion between the limit of the sum and the argument of the sine function.
  • A different participant proposes a proof using radians instead of degrees, leading to an expression for the sum of sine functions that could extend to real numbers.
  • There is an acknowledgment of the beauty of the proposed technique, but also a caution regarding the potential error in the application of the identity due to the difference in radian and degree measures.
  • Further contributions involve manipulating the expression to derive a form that aligns with the conjectured identity, including the use of half-angle formulas and trigonometric identities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the identity and its proof, with some agreeing on the mathematical manipulations while others question the assumptions made regarding the use of radians versus degrees. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the identity's validity and its relation to existing trigonometric rules.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the definitions of the functions involved, particularly in transitioning between radians and degrees. Some mathematical steps remain unresolved, and the scope of the identity's applicability is not fully established.

crash_matrix
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey guys,
I stumbled on an interesting and unexpected identity when looking for a simpler summation technique for inverse kinementics. Basically, I was trying to find a simpler way of summing IK vectors for some particular armature (like a tentacle or multi-branch armature on a robot). This question doesn't have to do with IK, but I accidentally calculated an identity rule I've not been able to attach to any other identity rule in trigonometry. This is the XPlore code that graphs the identity:
[The trig set is in degrees, not radians]
f(x)=sum(sin(t),t=0 to x step 1)
(Period,C)=(180,f(180))
g(x)=C*sin(x/2)^2+sin(x)/2
graph((f(x),g(x)),x=0 to Period)

When running those lines in XPlore (or any graphing calculator), you'll find that as the "step" value in the first line approaches zero, the two curves become equal. I've tested this rule across hundreds of different data sets and it always diverges perfectly, regarless of the precision of the calculator.
My question is: Is there an existing trig identity or rule (or set of iedntities or rules) that explains why the above functional set works?
Basically the "law" that it asserts is:
sum[0 to x](sin(x))=180 * sin(x/2)*sin(x/2) + sin(x)/2
where x is in degrees

I've looked up every trig and calculus identity and "rule" that I can find and I can't match it to anything.
It's not an important question, just something that's been bugging me for a while.

Thanks for looking,
--CM
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
crash_matrix said:
sum[0 to x](sin(x))=180 * sin(x/2)*sin(x/2) + sin(x)/2
where x is in degrees

Didn't you mean f(180), instead of 180, above? f(180) being the sum[t=0 to 180](sin(t)).

Also, to avoid confusing the two meanings of 'x', you may want to express the left-hand side as sum[t=0 to x](sin(t)) ; 'x' is the limit of the sum, not really the argument to sin().

The x's in the right-hand side are correct, as they mean the same value of 'x' as the limit of the sum in the left-hand side.

So, if I get you right, the conjecture is\sum_{t=0}^x \sin t = \left( \sum_{t=0}^{180} \sin t \right) \sin^2(x/2) + (\sin x)/2with the arguments in degrees, not radians.

The two overlapping curves (left-hand side, right-hand side) looking like this, for x=0 to 180:
http://205.196.120.39/598b993ef2cba10162b685226796555be3a77674f71a36dcbc42144e3185d7bd5g.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hi,

sum[0 to x](sin(x))=180 * sin(x/2)*sin(x/2) + sin(x)/2
I'm guessing you meant :
sum[k=0 to x](sin(k))=f(180)*sin(x/2)*sin(x/2) + sin(x)/2

If you're interested in a proof, here you go.

Let x \in \mathbb R, n \in \mathbb N.
I'll be using radians instead of degrees, so I'll show that we have :
\sum_{k=0}^n \sin k = f(\pi) \sin^2\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right)+\dfrac{\sin x}{2}
Where : f(n) = \displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^n \sin k (NB: that expression isn't yet defined on all real numbers and more particularly on n=\pi, but it will be as soon as we get another expression of it).


We have :
f(n) = \sum_{k=0}^n \text{Im}(e^{ik}) = \text{Im}\left(\sum_{k=0}^n e^{ik}\right) = \text{Im}\left(\sum_{k=0}^n (e^{i})^k\right)
And since e^i \neq 1, applying the formula for the sum of a geometric sequence gives :

f(n) = \text{Im}\left(\dfrac{(e^i)^{n+1}-1}{e^i-1}\right) = \text{Im}\left(\dfrac{e^{i(n+1)}-1}{e^i-1}\right)
By applying half angle formulas :

f(n) = \text{Im}\left(\dfrac{e^{i(n+1)/2}\cdot 2i\sin\left(\dfrac{n+1}{2}\right)}{e^{i/2}\cdot 2i\sin(1/2)}\right)

After simplifying we finally get :

f(n) = \dfrac{\sin\left(\dfrac{n+1}{2}\right) \sin\left(\dfrac{n}{2}\right)}{\sin\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)}

That's a quite "simple" expression that only uses products, that naturally extends f(n) to real numbers. I'll now show that the quantity f(x) is exactly equal to f(\pi) \sin^2\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right) + \dfrac{\sin x}{2} for all x \in \mathbb R.

According to the expression of f(x) obtained above, we have :
f(\pi) = \dfrac{\sin\left(\dfrac{\pi+1}{2}\right) }{\sin\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)} = \dfrac{\cos\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)}{\sin\left( \dfrac{1}{2}\right)}

Thus :
f(\pi) \sin^2\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right) + \dfrac{\sin x}{2} = \dfrac{\cos\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)\sin^2\left( \dfrac{x}{2}\right) }{\sin\left( \dfrac{1}{2}\right)}+\dfrac{\sin x}{2} = \\ \dfrac{2\cos\left( \dfrac{1}{2}\right)\sin^2\left( \dfrac{x}{2}\right) + \sin\left( \dfrac{1}{2}\right)\left[2\sin\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right)\cos\left( \dfrac{x}{2}\right)\right]}{2\sin\left( \dfrac{1}{2}\right)} = \\\dfrac{\sin\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right)\left[\cos\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right) \sin\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right) + \sin\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)\cos\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right)\right]}{\sin\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)} = \\\dfrac{\sin\left(\dfrac{x}{2}\right) \sin\left(\dfrac{x+1}{2}\right)}{\sin\left(\dfrac{1}{2}\right)} = f(x)

You just need to change from radians to degrees and it's done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sachav said:
We have :
f(n) = \sum_{k=0}^n \text{Im}(e^{ik}) = \text{Im}\left(\sum_{k=0}^n e^{ik}\right) = \text{Im}\left(\sum_{k=0}^n (e^{i})^k\right)
And since e^i \neq 1, applying the formula for the sum of a geometric sequence gives :

f(n) = \text{Im}\left(\dfrac{(e^i)^{n+1}-1}{e^i-1}\right) = \text{Im}\left(\dfrac{e^{i(n+1)}-1}{e^i-1}\right)
This is a good one, congrats... I was scratching my head on how to treat these sums.

Edit:
On second thought, the technique is beautiful but there has to be an error here. \sum_{k=0}^n \text{Im}(e^{ik}) is not the same as \sum_{k=0}^n \text{Im}(e^{ik \pi/180}), which was what the OP had in mind, regardless of whether you later extend the definition for a real n: "mind the step" !

Edit2:
Ah, you already said that. "You just need to change from radians to degrees and it's done." - i.e. Repeat the proof, this time with a pi/180 multiplier. When will I learn to read posts to the end.
 
Last edited:
So, if I followed right, you end up with<br /> f(n) = \frac{\sin\left(\frac{\pi n}{360}\right) \sin\left(\frac{\pi(n+1)}{360}\right)}<br /> {\sin\left(\frac{\pi}{360}\right)}<br />which, after expanding the sum of sines, and using a half-angle formula again, ends up in<br /> f(n) = \frac{\sin^2\left(\frac{\pi n}{360}\right)}{\tan\left(\frac{\pi}{360}\right)}<br /> + \frac{\sin\left(\frac{\pi n}{180}\right)}2<br />so that<br /> f(180) = \frac 1 {\tan\left(\frac{\pi}{360}\right)}<br />from which the conjecture<br /> f(n) = f(180) \sin^2(\pi n/360) + (\sin \pi n/180)/2<br />follows.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
27K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K