Exact Values of Trigonometric
Functions
By Graeme Mcrae on Sunday, December 30,
2001 - 09:30 am:
I need some help.
I'm making a page for my website, mcraefamily.com/MathHelp/GeometrySpecialAngles.htm
, which gives the exact values of the sine of various
angles.
As every high school student learns,
, and
, etc.
Also, every high school student learns the formulas for sines of sums of angles.
For example,
Perhaps the high school students don't know that Ptolemy discovered that
. Of course, he didn't express it in
those terms; instead he invoked the golden ratio, but in modern terms, this is
what he discovered.
Using this result, and the half-angle formula, a rich selection
of exact trig functions can be represented.
For example, with a little calculation it is easy to discover that
.
I'm getting to the part where I need help...
is not fully simplified. It can be further simplified
as
, or even more simply,
, which Ptolemy would tell you is just half the golden ratio.
But how is a person to recognize that
is not fully
simplified?
The reason I ask is that I calculated exact representations of
- - one is
and the other is
Both are quite correct; the first looks a bit simpler than the
second; however I fear there may be lurking just beyond my reach
a far simpler representation of this same value.
It gets worse.
To find
, I use the half angle formula, which gives me
I checked my work, and this is, in fact, an exact representation of
, but I have no way of knowing if a simpler representation
exists.
Can anyone help me? Thanks in advance.
By Yatir Halevi on Sunday, December 30,
2001 - 12:42 pm:
You might want to accept it or not (I know I wouldn't), but
using my computer i simplified (So, I have no proof)
sin84 to:
sin3 to:
Yatir
By Graeme Mcrae on Sunday, December 30,
2001 - 06:13 pm:
Thank you, Yatir.
You're right, I am reluctant to take such things on faith, or on
the authority of others. But luckily, I can verify that the
formulas you provided are in perfect agreement with the (more
complex) formulas I derived on my own. Moreover, the
simplification you provided gives me insight into a possible
method of simplifying such expressions.
In this case, I calculated
my sin84
your sin84
If both are true (or at least if they are equal to one another)
then
The best way to verify this is to square the left side, then take
its square root.
In other words, if
leftside = rightside
then
So let's square
, then take its square root:
Once you show me the simplified expression, I can use this method
to verify that it is identical to my needlessly complex
expression.
However, I still find it difficult to simplify such expressions.
Looking back on this one, I can see how it could be done...
Clearly, in this case,
is a ''perfect square'' - - the
square of
. To simplify the of the former expression, I need a method to recognize such perfect squares. Not just a method, but a constructive method: I would like to find its square root.
Toward that end I see that
, where
and
are rational
numbers. At this point, I conjecture that the rational and irrational parts of
such a sum can be ßeparated" so that the rational part is
, and the real
part is
.
Applying this, if
is a perfect square, then
That means
So
So
And
Solving these two equations for
and
, I get
, and
(or vice versa)
And sure enough,
the square of
is
- - - -
Let's see if
can be simplified this way. If the
expression inside the
is a perfect square then
So
and
Alas,
and
are not rational numbers;
, and
(or vice versa).
So I can't use this method to further simplify sin84.
Again, thanks for your help, I really appreciate it.
By Yatir Halevi on Sunday, December 30,
2001 - 08:42 pm:
You Welcome,
Hope it helped.
Yatir