What does the product of two cosine functions represent in terms of angles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trancefishy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Trig
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the interpretation of the product of two cosine functions, specifically \(\cos \theta_1 \cos \theta_2\), in relation to angles. Participants explore whether this product represents a dot product and consider its geometric implications, particularly in the context of projections. A key point made is that the meaning of the product can vary depending on the specific situation or vectors involved. The use of trigonometric identities, such as transforming the product into a sum of cosines, is highlighted as a useful approach for understanding the relationship. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of context and mathematical identities in interpreting trigonometric products.
trancefishy
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
what exactly does \cos \theta_1 \cos \theta_2 represent, in relation to the angles? is this a dot product? i have played, and don't really see what this product is supposed to represent.

EDIT: you know, i may have just answered my own question with a mere trig identity... perhaps i will figure this thing out I'm working on pretty soon...
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It would depend upon where these angles came from (dot product of what vectors?).

Imagine I asked why x^2 represented - a slightly ambiguous question, isn't it?
 
A simple geometrical interpretation I can think of: if you angles t1 and t2 are contiguous, and at the same vertex, the factor cos(t1)cos(t2) is the factor that a segment would shrink upon succesive perpendicular projections through those angles.

But, as Matt says, it would be useful to know more about the particular situation in which you are trying to interpret the product.
 
trancefishy said:
yes, i'd imagine it is a bit more ambiguous than I had supposed... I'm working on this
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=57665

You refer to my post??What is ambiguous about that??It's true i didn't make any picture,but i relied upon your imagination.I guess u're all to familiar with spherical coordinates and the angles \theta and \phi.Else,it's just math.A bit of ingenuity,though,else the geometric-triginomotric approach would have been more difficult to understand and would have necessitated a drawing.
That is just a simple product of trigonometrical functions.It has no meaning other than the one specified already.If u don't like that product (though i still cannot imagine the reasons),u can use this formula to transform it into a sum of cosines:
\cos \alpha \cos \beta=\frac{1}{2}[\cos(\alpha+\beta)+\cos(\alpha-\beta)]

I sincerely hope u're giving your best shot...Math is not a domain in which being lazy gives results...

Daniel.
 
that's what i missed. i (embarrassingly) just didn't think of trig identities. btw, i posted this thread before you had replied to my problem. i do thank you for your well given response, all is understood now :-)
 
Last edited:
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...
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top