Prove the identity: (1-sin(x))/(1+sin(x)) = tan(x) + 1/cos(x)
\[\frac{1-\sin(x)}{1+\sin(x)} \cdot \frac{1-\sin(x)}{1-\sin(x)}=\frac{1-2\sin(x)+\sin^2(x)}{1-\sin^2(x)}=\frac{1-2 \sin(x)+\sin^2(x)}{\cos^2(x)}\] \[\frac{1}{\cos^2(x)}-2 \frac{\sin(x)}{\cos^2(x)} +\tan^2(x)=\sec^2(x)-2 \frac{\sin(x)}{\cos(x)} \cdot \frac{1}{\cos(x)}+\tan^2(x)\] \[=\sec^2(x)-2 \tan(x) \sec(x)+\tan^2(x)\]
i don't see how it can be written as tan(x) + 1/cos(x)
So are you saying it's not an identity? :|
wait i'm looking it is tan(x)+1/cos(x) right?
tan(x) + (1/cos(x))
\[=(\sec(x)-\tan(x))^2\]
\[=(1)^2=1\]
sumpin wrong here
I've checked wolframalpha and it is indeed an identity that CAN be proven; I'm really stumped though.
did i make a mistake?
here is my proof let \[x=\frac{\pi}{4}\] then \[\frac{1-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}}{1+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}}\]is the left hand side, whereas the right hand side is \[1+\sqrt{2}\]
:|
and this would be a miracle, since the left hand side is smaller than one, and the right hand side is larger
so you ought to be stumped, because i cannot be correct.
sigh..Alright haha
Thanks anyways
hey don't believe everything you read in a text book...
I want to believe this is possible because Wolframlpham says it's a valid identity; but I guess we cannot solve it >_<
actually wolfram does not say it is an identity. it solved the equation for me here http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%281-sin%28x%29%29%2F%281%2Bsin%28x%29%29%3Dtan%28x%29+%2B+1%2Fcos%28x%29%2C+
put "verify" infront of the entire identity
hold the phone. it is not an identity for sure. i proved it, but wolfram solves the equation for x, which means it is certainly not true for all x
when i put "verify" it just timed out
Hmm..So I should conclude that this is not an identity after all?
hey why is that one theta bolder type than the other thetas
yes we concluded that way up there
identity means "true for any value of x" like \[2x+x=3x\] is an identity. this one is not
What if it was a theata instead of "x"
\[2 \theta+\theta=3 \theta? \] this is still an identity
2p+p=3p is still an identity
Alright, thanks for the evidence that indeed this is not an identity :)
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!