Results 1 to 10 of 10
Like Tree5Thanks
  • 2 Post By HallsofIvy
  • 1 Post By MarkFL
  • 1 Post By Plato
  • 1 Post By Plato

Thread: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

  1. #1
    Junior Member B9766's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    From
    Plymouth, MA
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    3

    Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    I'm having trouble graphing the "Witch of Agnesi" on various calculators and on the Desmond graphing web site.

    The correct parametric equations are: $x = 2\cot (t), y = 2\sin^2(t)$

    I originally called Texas Instruments for help because I was getting the wrong graph on my TI-84 but could get the right graph on the Desmond website.

    The TI-calculator doesn't have a $\cot$ key but does have a $tan^{-1}$ key, while the Desmond site does accept $\cot$ as an argument.

    So, on the TI-84 I entered the equations as: $x = 2\tan^{-1}(t), y = 2\sin(t)^2$ (note that $\sin^2$ cannot be entered, so the exponent is applied to the variable)

    But that gives a curve quite different than the actual "Witch of Agnesi".

    TI told me I had to enter the equations on the calculator as: $x = 2(1/tan(t)), y = 2\sin(t)^2$ And it worked! But they couldn't explain why.

    Does anyone have any idea why this should be the case? Because, it appears the $\tan^{-1}(t)$ can never be used for $\cot(t)$. It has to be $\dfrac{1}{tan(t)}$. And, apparently, they aren't the same.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    20,249
    Thanks
    3366

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    When working with functions, $\displaystyle f^{-1}$ means the inverse function to f, not the reciprocal. That is the standard convention.
    Thanks from B9766 and topsquark
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    MHF Contributor MarkFL's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    From
    St. Augustine, FL.
    Posts
    2,313
    Thanks
    1033

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Just in case you're interested, here's a thread I started on this plane curve on another site:

    https://themathhelp.com/threads/the-...f-agnesi.1928/
    Thanks from topsquark
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    22,401
    Thanks
    3292
    Awards
    1

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Quote Originally Posted by B9766 View Post
    I'm having trouble graphing the "Witch of Agnesi" on various calculators and on the Desmond graphing web site.

    The correct parametric equations are: $x = 2\cot (t), y = 2\sin^2(t)$

    I originally called Texas Instruments for help because I was getting the wrong graph on my TI-84 but could get the right graph on the Desmond website.

    The TI-calculator doesn't have a $\cot$ key but does have a $tan^{-1}$ key, while the Desmond site does accept $\cot$ as an argument.

    So, on the TI-84 I entered the equations as: $x = 2\tan^{-1}(t), y = 2\sin(t)^2$ (note that $\sin^2$ cannot be entered, so the exponent is applied to the variable)

    But that gives a curve quite different than the actual "Witch of Agnesi".

    TI told me I had to enter the equations on the calculator as: $x = 2(1/tan(t)), y = 2\sin(t)^2$ And it worked! But they couldn't explain why.

    Does anyone have any idea why this should be the case? Because, it appears the $\tan^{-1}(t)$ can never be used for $\cot(t)$. It has to be $\dfrac{1}{tan(t)}$. And, apparently, they aren't the same.
    The answer to your question has a complicated history. The notation $\tan^{-1}(x)$ was commonly used for the $\arctan(x)$ function in pre-1970 text books. I for one fought to have that changed. I went so far as to veto textbook adoptions that used that notation if they were for general education courses. But unlike you, I feared that students would see $\tan^{-1}(x)$ and think it was $\dfrac{1}{\tan(x)}$ and not realize it was really meant to be $\arctan(x)$ Thus I can only guess that Ti made the decision to drop the notation altogether.

    BTW LOOK HERE
    Last edited by Plato; Mar 11th 2019 at 03:23 PM.
    Thanks from topsquark
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Junior Member B9766's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    From
    Plymouth, MA
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    3

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Of course! I totally forgot about the inverse functions and their notation. What a duh moment.

    So then, it appears that calculators (at least TI anyway) only provides the sin, cos and tan functions (and their inverses) but the user has to input sec, csc and cot functions (and their inverses) as the reciprocals.

    I wish the TI people had just said that on the phone.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Junior Member B9766's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    From
    Plymouth, MA
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    3

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkFL View Post
    Just in case you're interested, here's a thread I started on this plane curve on another site:

    https://themathhelp.com/threads/the-...f-agnesi.1928/
    Thanks for the link. It's a great explanation. Except, my text book gives the parametric equations as: $(2cot(t), 2sin^2(t))$ as opposed to your $(2tan(t), 2cos^2(t))$

    Yours makes more sense to me. If I'm calculating correctly, the one in my text book produces $x=div/0!, y=0\ \ at\ \ t=0$ which isn't anything close to the curve yours produces. Can you suggest what I may be missing?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    MHF Contributor MarkFL's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    From
    St. Augustine, FL.
    Posts
    2,313
    Thanks
    1033

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Quote Originally Posted by B9766 View Post
    Thanks for the link. It's a great explanation. Except, my text book gives the parametric equations as: $(2cot(t), 2sin^2(t))$ as opposed to your $(2tan(t), 2cos^2(t))$

    Yours makes more sense to me. If I'm calculating correctly, the one in my text book produces $x=div/0!, y=0\ \ at\ \ t=0$ which isn't anything close to the curve yours produces. Can you suggest what I may be missing?
    It would appear to me that in the implementation I derived, I am using for the parameter:

    $\displaystyle -\frac{\pi}{2}<t<\frac{\pi}{2}$

    Whereas you are using a complementary range:

    $\displaystyle -\pi<t<0$
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Member
    Joined
    Apr 2018
    From
    Sukoharjo
    Posts
    103
    Thanks
    22

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Wait, so... $\displaystyle sin^2x∙sin^{1}x\neq sinx$?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    22,401
    Thanks
    3292
    Awards
    1

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Monoxdifly View Post
    Wait, so... $\displaystyle sin^2x∙sin^{1}x\neq sinx$?
    Well that depends upon what the notation $sin^{-1}(x)$ means.
    Mathematicians, such as myself, have spent many years working on issues in undergraduate studies,( note I did not say mathematics education).
    Before the 1980 and the reform movement the notation $sin^{-1}(x)=\arcsin(x)$. But calculators changed all. There was a need for a context free notation.
    If we need the reciprocal of the $\sin(x)$ it became $[\sin(x)]^{-1}$ as oppose to $\sin^{-1}(x)$ because the latter is $\arcsin(x)$
    Last edited by Plato; Mar 11th 2019 at 08:16 PM.
    Thanks from topsquark
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Junior Member B9766's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    From
    Plymouth, MA
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    3

    Re: Why is cot(t) not= tan^-1(t)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Monoxdifly View Post
    Wait, so... $\displaystyle sin^2x∙sin^{1}x\neq sinx$?
    In the course I'm taking, the professor did warn us (I had forgotten) not to confuse $sin^{-1}(x)$ with $\dfrac{1}{sin(x)}$.

    As Plato points out, the -1 exponent is easily confused because it usually means "the power of -1". But in this case it means "the inverse function of".

    For the $sin$ function, $sin^{-1}(x) = arcsin(x)$, where $arcsin(x)$ is the preferable notation for the obvious reason that's it's less confusing to people who don't use it all the time.

    So the question I would ask is: What is $sin^{-2}(x)$?

    Is it $\dfrac{1}{sin^2(x)}$ or is it $arcsin^2(x)$?

    Plato, what's your call on this one?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum