The discussion revolves around the integral of sec(x) and the outputs produced by the TI 89 Platinum calculator. Participants are examining the discrepancies in the results returned by the calculator and questioning whether these are due to computation errors or syntax issues within the calculator's programming.
Participants express differing views on the reliability of the TI 89's outputs, with some questioning the computation and others pointing out the equivalence of the mathematical expressions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the cause of the discrepancies.
There are unresolved questions about the assumptions made in the calculations and the potential impact of the calculator's syntax on the results. The discussion does not clarify the underlying reasons for the "non-real result" or the conditions under which the outputs change.
I don't understand why I'm getting a "non-real result" from the calculation when I enter x=0. Why is that occurring? It should be the same regardless of which form it's written in.Baluncore said:Ln(abs(sin(x)+1)/abs(cos(x))) = Ln(abs(cos(x))/abs(sin(x)-1))
UPDATE: Just to make me look like a liar... Now my TI 89 is returning 0 for x=0... ? It was returning "Non-real result" before.jdcirbo said:My TI 89 Platinum is returning ln(abs(cos(x))/abs(sin(x)-1)) for integral sec(x)dx. It's supposed to return ln(abs(tan(x)+sec(x)) or ln(abs(sin(x)+1)/abs(cos(x))). If you enter x=0, you get 'undefined' the way my TI 89 is doing it. It's supposed to return 0. Is this a computation error or something with the syntax of how TI Basic computes integrals?