2 ms·
No. There's the analytic definition of sin that does not mention curves or lengths at all: the sine is the unique function that satisfies the following differen
by jordigh 11y ago
No. There's the analytic definition of sin that does not mention curves or lengths at all: the sine is the unique function that satisfies the following differential equation and initial value problem:
s''(x) + s(x) = 0
s(0) = 0
s'(0) = 1
It's a nifty way to define sine purely by its differential properties. Of course, it requires some work to show that differential equations have a solution and that this particular solution is sine (i.e. has the properties you want a sine to have), but once you do that work, it's pretty easy to prove things such as sin^2(x) + cos^2(x) = 1.
On the other hand, starting from the geometric definitions (and building the framework for that, such as arclength, which really requires calculus), it takes a longer route to get to the calculus of sine. Historically this was the route, but we have found shortcuts since then.
- jameshart 11y agoInteresting - I was sort of wondering if you could get sine just from simple harmonic motion, and that's basically what those equations do - the first is equivalent to saying s''(x) = -s(x), so acceleration is opposite to and linearly proportional to (well, equal to in this simple case) displacement. That's a good point.
- retbull 11y agoDude I needed you when I was working through my Calc 2 stuff. I didn't ever see that definition as a route to use. Way nicer than memorizing the unit circle which eventually translated into "knowing" the answers to the derivatives and integrals.