MedVision ad

3 Unit Maths HSC Exam Revision (2 Viewers)

random-1006

Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
988
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
.

If so, give a pair of values that satisfies the condition. If not, explain why not

I made this one up myself, its amazing the sort of questions you can make up if you really think about the content.
 
Last edited:

hscishard

Active Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
2,033
Location
study room...maybe
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
.

If so, give a pair of values that satisfies the condition. If not, explain why not

I made this one up myself, its amazing the sort of questions you can make up if you really think about the content.
No, the graph is a negative definite, thus the definite integral is always negative as b is greater than a

Oh sht it's the reciprocal.
Still..the graph is still negative :D
 
Last edited:

random-1006

Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
988
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
No, the graph is a negative definite, thus the definite integral is always negative as b is greater than a

Oh sht it's the reciprocal
lol, your lucky, it doesnt make a difference, didnt you notice that first time, 1/ negative is still negative
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
8,391
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Hopefully part d) will make you think lol.

 

cutemouse

Account Closed
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,250
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Hopefully part d) will make you think lol.

For part (d) it's something to do with the fact that you need to do 2pi - pi/4 for some reason... I think ... Will have a look later.

Maybe because in actual fact the result in (a) should be stated as arctana + arctanb=arctan[(a+b)/(1-ab)] +2*pi*k (for appropriate integral value of k) due to some trigonometric property...?
 
Last edited:

random-1006

Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
988
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
when we are proving the formula part 1, we are assuming x is acute

A= arctanx, B = arctany
tanA=x, tanB= y
etc.

the above step is assuming acute x, and the limits of integration are 3 and -2 RADIANS ( which is larger than pi/2, ie larger than 90 degrees, not an acute angle.

either that or something about the range of arctan is : -pi/2 < y < pi/2
 
Last edited:

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
8,391
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Maybe because in actual fact the result in (a) should be stated as arctana + arctanb=arctan[(a+b)/(1-ab)] +2*pi*k (for appropriate integral value of k) due to some trigonometric property...?
Note quite. If you remember the way that the y = tan-1x was defined, it requires that for each x there must be a unique value of y. The addition of 2kπ seems to imply non-uniqueness.

when we are proving the formula part 1, we are assuming x is acute

A= arctanx, B = arctany
tanA=x, tanB= y
etc.

the above step is assuming acute x, and the limits of integration are 3 and -2 RADIANS ( which is larger than pi/2, ie larger than 90 degrees, not an acute angle.
x and y are not "angles". The inverse tangent of them are "angles". So from your labelling, A and B are the angles, not x and y. Even with that correction, tan-14 and tan-12 both give acute angles, so that doesn't quite explain the flaw.
 

cutemouse

Account Closed
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,250
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
There is a discontinuity at x=4.
Well technically speaking you should say that there's a gap in the domain. Talking about continuity at a point not in the domain of the function doesn't make sense.

Although at HSC level your reasoning should suffice.
 

cutemouse

Account Closed
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,250
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I know...



Implies that the LHS and RHS must both be within the (-pi/2, pi/2)... if the LHS is outside this range then the equation is not defined/meaningless, which is the case if the LHS = arctan3+arctan2...
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top