Proving sine of sum identity for all angles












0












$begingroup$


Could anyone present a proof of sine of sum identity for any pair of angles $a$, $b$?



$$sin(a+b) = sin(a) cos(b) + cos(a) sin(b)$$



Most proofs are based on geometric approach (angles are $<90$ in this case). But please note the formula is supposed to work for any pair of angles.



The other derivation I know is using Euler's formula, namely this one.



There's one thing I don't feel comfortable with - we know that we add angles when multiplying two complex numbers. This is proven with sine of sum identity. So first we prove how multiplication of two complex exponentials works using sine of sum identity, and then use multiplication of complex exponentials to prove sine of sum identity. Can you tell me how it's not a circular argument?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is your definition of sine and cosine?
    $endgroup$
    – David H
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
    $endgroup$
    – Orest Bucicovschi
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:53












  • $begingroup$
    I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
    $endgroup$
    – servabat
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:59












  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
    $endgroup$
    – user4205580
    Jan 18 '15 at 8:31










  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Jan 18 '15 at 14:06
















0












$begingroup$


Could anyone present a proof of sine of sum identity for any pair of angles $a$, $b$?



$$sin(a+b) = sin(a) cos(b) + cos(a) sin(b)$$



Most proofs are based on geometric approach (angles are $<90$ in this case). But please note the formula is supposed to work for any pair of angles.



The other derivation I know is using Euler's formula, namely this one.



There's one thing I don't feel comfortable with - we know that we add angles when multiplying two complex numbers. This is proven with sine of sum identity. So first we prove how multiplication of two complex exponentials works using sine of sum identity, and then use multiplication of complex exponentials to prove sine of sum identity. Can you tell me how it's not a circular argument?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is your definition of sine and cosine?
    $endgroup$
    – David H
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
    $endgroup$
    – Orest Bucicovschi
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:53












  • $begingroup$
    I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
    $endgroup$
    – servabat
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:59












  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
    $endgroup$
    – user4205580
    Jan 18 '15 at 8:31










  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Jan 18 '15 at 14:06














0












0








0


1



$begingroup$


Could anyone present a proof of sine of sum identity for any pair of angles $a$, $b$?



$$sin(a+b) = sin(a) cos(b) + cos(a) sin(b)$$



Most proofs are based on geometric approach (angles are $<90$ in this case). But please note the formula is supposed to work for any pair of angles.



The other derivation I know is using Euler's formula, namely this one.



There's one thing I don't feel comfortable with - we know that we add angles when multiplying two complex numbers. This is proven with sine of sum identity. So first we prove how multiplication of two complex exponentials works using sine of sum identity, and then use multiplication of complex exponentials to prove sine of sum identity. Can you tell me how it's not a circular argument?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Could anyone present a proof of sine of sum identity for any pair of angles $a$, $b$?



$$sin(a+b) = sin(a) cos(b) + cos(a) sin(b)$$



Most proofs are based on geometric approach (angles are $<90$ in this case). But please note the formula is supposed to work for any pair of angles.



The other derivation I know is using Euler's formula, namely this one.



There's one thing I don't feel comfortable with - we know that we add angles when multiplying two complex numbers. This is proven with sine of sum identity. So first we prove how multiplication of two complex exponentials works using sine of sum identity, and then use multiplication of complex exponentials to prove sine of sum identity. Can you tell me how it's not a circular argument?







trigonometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:21









Community

1




1










asked Jan 17 '15 at 23:43









user4205580user4205580

4711132




4711132












  • $begingroup$
    What is your definition of sine and cosine?
    $endgroup$
    – David H
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
    $endgroup$
    – Orest Bucicovschi
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:53












  • $begingroup$
    I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
    $endgroup$
    – servabat
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:59












  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
    $endgroup$
    – user4205580
    Jan 18 '15 at 8:31










  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Jan 18 '15 at 14:06


















  • $begingroup$
    What is your definition of sine and cosine?
    $endgroup$
    – David H
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
    $endgroup$
    – Orest Bucicovschi
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:53












  • $begingroup$
    I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
    $endgroup$
    – servabat
    Jan 17 '15 at 23:59












  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
    $endgroup$
    – user4205580
    Jan 18 '15 at 8:31










  • $begingroup$
    How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
    $endgroup$
    – David K
    Jan 18 '15 at 14:06
















$begingroup$
What is your definition of sine and cosine?
$endgroup$
– David H
Jan 17 '15 at 23:52




$begingroup$
What is your definition of sine and cosine?
$endgroup$
– David H
Jan 17 '15 at 23:52












$begingroup$
The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
$endgroup$
– Orest Bucicovschi
Jan 17 '15 at 23:53






$begingroup$
The answer may depend on your definition of $sin$, $cos$. If you use the definition of $e^{ia}$ to be $cos a + i sin a$, then yes, the argument is circular. What is $e^z$? What is $cos x$, $sin x$? This needs to be sorted out.
$endgroup$
– Orest Bucicovschi
Jan 17 '15 at 23:53














$begingroup$
I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
$endgroup$
– servabat
Jan 17 '15 at 23:59






$begingroup$
I would use crossproduct but I guess it's the geometric approach (else this can be of course proven with analytical tools : derivatives and stuffs).
$endgroup$
– servabat
Jan 17 '15 at 23:59














$begingroup$
How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
$endgroup$
– user4205580
Jan 18 '15 at 8:31




$begingroup$
How many definitions of sine and cosine are there? Let $P=(x,y)$ be a point on cartesian plane, $r$ is the distance from the origin in the straight line. Then sine of the angle between $|OP|$ and positive $X$ is $frac{y}{r}$ and cosine - $frac{x}{r}$.
$endgroup$
– user4205580
Jan 18 '15 at 8:31












$begingroup$
How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
$endgroup$
– David K
Jan 18 '15 at 14:06




$begingroup$
How many definitions? For any really interesting mathematical system, it is very likely that different people have constructed the definitions of that system in different (but mutually consistent) ways. Usually the $theta$ in $sintheta$ and $costheta$ is a number obtained in some way (such as the length of an arc of a unit circle). If it is defined as a particular geometric figure that must include the positive $x$-axis, then you have to define what you mean by "any angle" and "adding two angles".
$endgroup$
– David K
Jan 18 '15 at 14:06










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

here is a geometric proof i saw in an old american mathematics monthly which uses the unit circle. first show that the square of the chord connecting $(1,0)$ and $(cos t, sin t)$ is $2(1-cos t)$ using the distance formula. now reinterpret
$$text{ length of chord making an angle $t$ at the center is } 2 - 2cos t $$



now compute the length squared between $cos t, sin t), (cos s, sin s)$ in two different ways:



(i) distance formula gives you $2 - cos t cos s - sin t sin s$



(ii) chord making an angle $t - s$ is $2 - cos(t-s)$



equating the two gives you $$cos (t-s) = cos t cos s + sin t sin s tag 1$$



now use the fact $cos pi/2$ to derive $cos (pi/2 - s) = sin s$ by putting $t = pi/2$ in $(1)$



put $t=0,$ to derive $cos$ is an even function. put $t = -pi/2,$ to show $sin$ is an odd function. after all these you derive
$$sin(t-s) = sin t cos t - cos t sin s $$ and two for the sums.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    You can prove $$e^{ix}=cos(x)+isin(x)$$without using trig sum identities. e.g. let:$$y=cos(x)+isin(x)tag{1}$$$$therefore frac{dy}{dx}=-sin(x)+icos(x)=iy$$$$therefore intfrac{1}{y}dy=int idx$$$$therefore ln(y)=ix+C$$and we can show $C=0$ because from (1) $y=1$ when $x=0$, therefore:$$ln(y)=ix$$$$therefore y=e^{ix}$$that therefore removes the circular argument you mentioned in yur question.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      Euler’s Formula...



      $$ sin(x) = mbox{Im}(e^{ix}) = frac{e^{ix} - e^{-ix}}{2i} $$
      $$ sin(a+b) = mbox{Im}(e^{(a+b)i}) = mbox{Im}(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) $$
      $$ = frac{e^{(a+b)i} - e^{-(a+b)i}}{2i} = frac{(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) - (e^{-ai} * e^{-bi})}{2i} $$
      $$ = frac{((cos(a)+isin(a))(cos(b)+isin(b)) - ((cos(-a)+isin(-a))(cos(-b)+isin(-b))}{2i} $$



      After some thorough simplifying...



      $$ = frac{(2isin(a)cos(b) + 2icos(a)sin(b))}{2i} $$
      $$ sin(a+b) = sin(a)cos(b) + cos(a)sin(b) $$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$





















        -1












        $begingroup$

        The statement:



        $ e^{ix} = sin(x) +icos(x) $



        is derived using Taylor series which can be proven like so



        Just sum $cos(x)$ and $sin(x)$ for $f(x)$ to convince yourself. If you sum up those two Taylor series, it will give you the Taylor series for $e^{ix}$.



        We never aknowledged the existence of sum angle identity in this proof, hence there is not circular reasoning.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$














          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1108447%2fproving-sine-of-sum-identity-for-all-angles%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes








          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          3












          $begingroup$

          here is a geometric proof i saw in an old american mathematics monthly which uses the unit circle. first show that the square of the chord connecting $(1,0)$ and $(cos t, sin t)$ is $2(1-cos t)$ using the distance formula. now reinterpret
          $$text{ length of chord making an angle $t$ at the center is } 2 - 2cos t $$



          now compute the length squared between $cos t, sin t), (cos s, sin s)$ in two different ways:



          (i) distance formula gives you $2 - cos t cos s - sin t sin s$



          (ii) chord making an angle $t - s$ is $2 - cos(t-s)$



          equating the two gives you $$cos (t-s) = cos t cos s + sin t sin s tag 1$$



          now use the fact $cos pi/2$ to derive $cos (pi/2 - s) = sin s$ by putting $t = pi/2$ in $(1)$



          put $t=0,$ to derive $cos$ is an even function. put $t = -pi/2,$ to show $sin$ is an odd function. after all these you derive
          $$sin(t-s) = sin t cos t - cos t sin s $$ and two for the sums.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$


















            3












            $begingroup$

            here is a geometric proof i saw in an old american mathematics monthly which uses the unit circle. first show that the square of the chord connecting $(1,0)$ and $(cos t, sin t)$ is $2(1-cos t)$ using the distance formula. now reinterpret
            $$text{ length of chord making an angle $t$ at the center is } 2 - 2cos t $$



            now compute the length squared between $cos t, sin t), (cos s, sin s)$ in two different ways:



            (i) distance formula gives you $2 - cos t cos s - sin t sin s$



            (ii) chord making an angle $t - s$ is $2 - cos(t-s)$



            equating the two gives you $$cos (t-s) = cos t cos s + sin t sin s tag 1$$



            now use the fact $cos pi/2$ to derive $cos (pi/2 - s) = sin s$ by putting $t = pi/2$ in $(1)$



            put $t=0,$ to derive $cos$ is an even function. put $t = -pi/2,$ to show $sin$ is an odd function. after all these you derive
            $$sin(t-s) = sin t cos t - cos t sin s $$ and two for the sums.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$
















              3












              3








              3





              $begingroup$

              here is a geometric proof i saw in an old american mathematics monthly which uses the unit circle. first show that the square of the chord connecting $(1,0)$ and $(cos t, sin t)$ is $2(1-cos t)$ using the distance formula. now reinterpret
              $$text{ length of chord making an angle $t$ at the center is } 2 - 2cos t $$



              now compute the length squared between $cos t, sin t), (cos s, sin s)$ in two different ways:



              (i) distance formula gives you $2 - cos t cos s - sin t sin s$



              (ii) chord making an angle $t - s$ is $2 - cos(t-s)$



              equating the two gives you $$cos (t-s) = cos t cos s + sin t sin s tag 1$$



              now use the fact $cos pi/2$ to derive $cos (pi/2 - s) = sin s$ by putting $t = pi/2$ in $(1)$



              put $t=0,$ to derive $cos$ is an even function. put $t = -pi/2,$ to show $sin$ is an odd function. after all these you derive
              $$sin(t-s) = sin t cos t - cos t sin s $$ and two for the sums.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              here is a geometric proof i saw in an old american mathematics monthly which uses the unit circle. first show that the square of the chord connecting $(1,0)$ and $(cos t, sin t)$ is $2(1-cos t)$ using the distance formula. now reinterpret
              $$text{ length of chord making an angle $t$ at the center is } 2 - 2cos t $$



              now compute the length squared between $cos t, sin t), (cos s, sin s)$ in two different ways:



              (i) distance formula gives you $2 - cos t cos s - sin t sin s$



              (ii) chord making an angle $t - s$ is $2 - cos(t-s)$



              equating the two gives you $$cos (t-s) = cos t cos s + sin t sin s tag 1$$



              now use the fact $cos pi/2$ to derive $cos (pi/2 - s) = sin s$ by putting $t = pi/2$ in $(1)$



              put $t=0,$ to derive $cos$ is an even function. put $t = -pi/2,$ to show $sin$ is an odd function. after all these you derive
              $$sin(t-s) = sin t cos t - cos t sin s $$ and two for the sums.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Jan 18 '15 at 13:43

























              answered Jan 18 '15 at 0:46









              abelabel

              26.6k12148




              26.6k12148























                  2












                  $begingroup$

                  You can prove $$e^{ix}=cos(x)+isin(x)$$without using trig sum identities. e.g. let:$$y=cos(x)+isin(x)tag{1}$$$$therefore frac{dy}{dx}=-sin(x)+icos(x)=iy$$$$therefore intfrac{1}{y}dy=int idx$$$$therefore ln(y)=ix+C$$and we can show $C=0$ because from (1) $y=1$ when $x=0$, therefore:$$ln(y)=ix$$$$therefore y=e^{ix}$$that therefore removes the circular argument you mentioned in yur question.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$


















                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    You can prove $$e^{ix}=cos(x)+isin(x)$$without using trig sum identities. e.g. let:$$y=cos(x)+isin(x)tag{1}$$$$therefore frac{dy}{dx}=-sin(x)+icos(x)=iy$$$$therefore intfrac{1}{y}dy=int idx$$$$therefore ln(y)=ix+C$$and we can show $C=0$ because from (1) $y=1$ when $x=0$, therefore:$$ln(y)=ix$$$$therefore y=e^{ix}$$that therefore removes the circular argument you mentioned in yur question.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$
















                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      You can prove $$e^{ix}=cos(x)+isin(x)$$without using trig sum identities. e.g. let:$$y=cos(x)+isin(x)tag{1}$$$$therefore frac{dy}{dx}=-sin(x)+icos(x)=iy$$$$therefore intfrac{1}{y}dy=int idx$$$$therefore ln(y)=ix+C$$and we can show $C=0$ because from (1) $y=1$ when $x=0$, therefore:$$ln(y)=ix$$$$therefore y=e^{ix}$$that therefore removes the circular argument you mentioned in yur question.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      You can prove $$e^{ix}=cos(x)+isin(x)$$without using trig sum identities. e.g. let:$$y=cos(x)+isin(x)tag{1}$$$$therefore frac{dy}{dx}=-sin(x)+icos(x)=iy$$$$therefore intfrac{1}{y}dy=int idx$$$$therefore ln(y)=ix+C$$and we can show $C=0$ because from (1) $y=1$ when $x=0$, therefore:$$ln(y)=ix$$$$therefore y=e^{ix}$$that therefore removes the circular argument you mentioned in yur question.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Jan 17 '15 at 23:51









                      MufasaMufasa

                      5,02311323




                      5,02311323























                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          Euler’s Formula...



                          $$ sin(x) = mbox{Im}(e^{ix}) = frac{e^{ix} - e^{-ix}}{2i} $$
                          $$ sin(a+b) = mbox{Im}(e^{(a+b)i}) = mbox{Im}(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) $$
                          $$ = frac{e^{(a+b)i} - e^{-(a+b)i}}{2i} = frac{(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) - (e^{-ai} * e^{-bi})}{2i} $$
                          $$ = frac{((cos(a)+isin(a))(cos(b)+isin(b)) - ((cos(-a)+isin(-a))(cos(-b)+isin(-b))}{2i} $$



                          After some thorough simplifying...



                          $$ = frac{(2isin(a)cos(b) + 2icos(a)sin(b))}{2i} $$
                          $$ sin(a+b) = sin(a)cos(b) + cos(a)sin(b) $$






                          share|cite|improve this answer











                          $endgroup$


















                            0












                            $begingroup$

                            Euler’s Formula...



                            $$ sin(x) = mbox{Im}(e^{ix}) = frac{e^{ix} - e^{-ix}}{2i} $$
                            $$ sin(a+b) = mbox{Im}(e^{(a+b)i}) = mbox{Im}(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) $$
                            $$ = frac{e^{(a+b)i} - e^{-(a+b)i}}{2i} = frac{(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) - (e^{-ai} * e^{-bi})}{2i} $$
                            $$ = frac{((cos(a)+isin(a))(cos(b)+isin(b)) - ((cos(-a)+isin(-a))(cos(-b)+isin(-b))}{2i} $$



                            After some thorough simplifying...



                            $$ = frac{(2isin(a)cos(b) + 2icos(a)sin(b))}{2i} $$
                            $$ sin(a+b) = sin(a)cos(b) + cos(a)sin(b) $$






                            share|cite|improve this answer











                            $endgroup$
















                              0












                              0








                              0





                              $begingroup$

                              Euler’s Formula...



                              $$ sin(x) = mbox{Im}(e^{ix}) = frac{e^{ix} - e^{-ix}}{2i} $$
                              $$ sin(a+b) = mbox{Im}(e^{(a+b)i}) = mbox{Im}(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) $$
                              $$ = frac{e^{(a+b)i} - e^{-(a+b)i}}{2i} = frac{(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) - (e^{-ai} * e^{-bi})}{2i} $$
                              $$ = frac{((cos(a)+isin(a))(cos(b)+isin(b)) - ((cos(-a)+isin(-a))(cos(-b)+isin(-b))}{2i} $$



                              After some thorough simplifying...



                              $$ = frac{(2isin(a)cos(b) + 2icos(a)sin(b))}{2i} $$
                              $$ sin(a+b) = sin(a)cos(b) + cos(a)sin(b) $$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$



                              Euler’s Formula...



                              $$ sin(x) = mbox{Im}(e^{ix}) = frac{e^{ix} - e^{-ix}}{2i} $$
                              $$ sin(a+b) = mbox{Im}(e^{(a+b)i}) = mbox{Im}(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) $$
                              $$ = frac{e^{(a+b)i} - e^{-(a+b)i}}{2i} = frac{(e^{ai} * e^{bi}) - (e^{-ai} * e^{-bi})}{2i} $$
                              $$ = frac{((cos(a)+isin(a))(cos(b)+isin(b)) - ((cos(-a)+isin(-a))(cos(-b)+isin(-b))}{2i} $$



                              After some thorough simplifying...



                              $$ = frac{(2isin(a)cos(b) + 2icos(a)sin(b))}{2i} $$
                              $$ sin(a+b) = sin(a)cos(b) + cos(a)sin(b) $$







                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer








                              edited Feb 11 at 15:25

























                              answered Dec 31 '18 at 19:06









                              Michael LeeMichael Lee

                              5618




                              5618























                                  -1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  The statement:



                                  $ e^{ix} = sin(x) +icos(x) $



                                  is derived using Taylor series which can be proven like so



                                  Just sum $cos(x)$ and $sin(x)$ for $f(x)$ to convince yourself. If you sum up those two Taylor series, it will give you the Taylor series for $e^{ix}$.



                                  We never aknowledged the existence of sum angle identity in this proof, hence there is not circular reasoning.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer











                                  $endgroup$


















                                    -1












                                    $begingroup$

                                    The statement:



                                    $ e^{ix} = sin(x) +icos(x) $



                                    is derived using Taylor series which can be proven like so



                                    Just sum $cos(x)$ and $sin(x)$ for $f(x)$ to convince yourself. If you sum up those two Taylor series, it will give you the Taylor series for $e^{ix}$.



                                    We never aknowledged the existence of sum angle identity in this proof, hence there is not circular reasoning.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer











                                    $endgroup$
















                                      -1












                                      -1








                                      -1





                                      $begingroup$

                                      The statement:



                                      $ e^{ix} = sin(x) +icos(x) $



                                      is derived using Taylor series which can be proven like so



                                      Just sum $cos(x)$ and $sin(x)$ for $f(x)$ to convince yourself. If you sum up those two Taylor series, it will give you the Taylor series for $e^{ix}$.



                                      We never aknowledged the existence of sum angle identity in this proof, hence there is not circular reasoning.






                                      share|cite|improve this answer











                                      $endgroup$



                                      The statement:



                                      $ e^{ix} = sin(x) +icos(x) $



                                      is derived using Taylor series which can be proven like so



                                      Just sum $cos(x)$ and $sin(x)$ for $f(x)$ to convince yourself. If you sum up those two Taylor series, it will give you the Taylor series for $e^{ix}$.



                                      We never aknowledged the existence of sum angle identity in this proof, hence there is not circular reasoning.







                                      share|cite|improve this answer














                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      edited Apr 15 at 17:55









                                      Daniele Tampieri

                                      2,76721023




                                      2,76721023










                                      answered Apr 15 at 17:09









                                      GLaDOSGLaDOS

                                      284




                                      284






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1108447%2fproving-sine-of-sum-identity-for-all-angles%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

                                          ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

                                          Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?