Inverse trig question (1 Viewer)

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
7,201
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
ur trolling.
inverse sin + inverse cos = pi/2 is like by definition basically.
is this assuming?
No, I’m talking about your inverse cosine result that you called on.
 

idkkdi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,446
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
If it took you three lines to explain that it isn't so obvious?
.....
x + 3a = z
3a = y (from an identity that is obvious)
----------------------> this was my working in solution lol.
so two lines.
 

idkkdi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,446
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
If it took you three lines to explain that it isn't so obvious?
i love how we're considering these parts.
the last lines of my solution are even less obvious hahahaha. honestly not bothered to latex or type reasoning.
have fun looking at it lol.
 

idkkdi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,446
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
If it took you three lines to explain that it isn't so obvious?
On the subject of unobvious-ity. i doubt i would see that hidden quadratic you did in suitable minutes in an exam.
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
7,201
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I think the use of the word “obviously” was misleading because normally that is used to call on a result, not used in place of a “hence” or “therefore”.

Either way, the part where you have an equation in terms of u is not trivial and is missing some working.
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
7,201
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
On the subject of unobvious-ity. i doubt i would see that hidden quadratic you did in suitable minutes in an exam.
Actually, the part where you had

lends itself to an obvious quadratic by cosine double angles.
 

idkkdi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,446
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
I think the use of the word “obviously” was misleading because normally that is used to call on a result, not used in place of a “hence” or “therefore”.

Either way, the part where you have an equation in terms of u is not trivial and is missing some working.
we all know mathematicians use 'trivial' to skip working out because they're a tad lazy hahaha.
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
7,201
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
we all know mathematicians use 'trivial' to skip working out because they're a tad lazy hahaha.
Yeah, once you become an actual mathematician and writing academic papers. That will never fly in an exam at school or uni though lol
 

idkkdi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,446
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
Yeah, once you become an actual mathematician and writing academic papers. That will never fly in an exam at school or uni lol
but it flies in textbooks lol.
Though trivial is a toned down version of the true mathematician phrase when writing textbooks,
"the proof(/example) is left as an exercise to the reader"
 

Qeru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
263
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
I think if you explained why and added some explanation between steps your proof would have made more sense.
 

Qeru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
263
Gender
Male
HSC
2021
You could have done where which is a basic definition that is allowed, to prove the inverse formula. Also like Trebla said you could do I think this is a more logical progression.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top