Solve $sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1$












3












$begingroup$



Solve $sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1$




I understand it can be very easily solved by expanding in terms of $sin x$ and $cos x$, gives $x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}$. But, what if I do the following:
$$
sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1\
text{Differentiating}impliessqrt{2}sec xtan x+sec^2 x=0impliessqrt{2}tan x+sec x=0
$$

Step 1
$$
sec x=-sqrt{2}tan x=frac{1-tan x}{sqrt{2}}implies2tan x=tan x-1impliestan x=-1\
boxed{x=npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

Step 2
$$
tan x=1-sqrt{2}sec x=frac{-sec x}{sqrt{2}}implies2sec x-sqrt{2}=sec x\
impliessec x=sqrt{2}impliesboxed{x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}}
$$

$$
x=npi-frac{pi}{4}quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\implies bigg[x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}text{ or }x=2npi+frac{3pi}{4}bigg]quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\
implies boxed{x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

In my attempt why do I need Step 2 to get the complete solution ?



Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 6




    $begingroup$
    This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:12










  • $begingroup$
    Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:49








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:59






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
    $endgroup$
    – ss1729
    Dec 3 '18 at 13:33
















3












$begingroup$



Solve $sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1$




I understand it can be very easily solved by expanding in terms of $sin x$ and $cos x$, gives $x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}$. But, what if I do the following:
$$
sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1\
text{Differentiating}impliessqrt{2}sec xtan x+sec^2 x=0impliessqrt{2}tan x+sec x=0
$$

Step 1
$$
sec x=-sqrt{2}tan x=frac{1-tan x}{sqrt{2}}implies2tan x=tan x-1impliestan x=-1\
boxed{x=npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

Step 2
$$
tan x=1-sqrt{2}sec x=frac{-sec x}{sqrt{2}}implies2sec x-sqrt{2}=sec x\
impliessec x=sqrt{2}impliesboxed{x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}}
$$

$$
x=npi-frac{pi}{4}quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\implies bigg[x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}text{ or }x=2npi+frac{3pi}{4}bigg]quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\
implies boxed{x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

In my attempt why do I need Step 2 to get the complete solution ?



Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 6




    $begingroup$
    This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:12










  • $begingroup$
    Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:49








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:59






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
    $endgroup$
    – ss1729
    Dec 3 '18 at 13:33














3












3








3





$begingroup$



Solve $sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1$




I understand it can be very easily solved by expanding in terms of $sin x$ and $cos x$, gives $x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}$. But, what if I do the following:
$$
sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1\
text{Differentiating}impliessqrt{2}sec xtan x+sec^2 x=0impliessqrt{2}tan x+sec x=0
$$

Step 1
$$
sec x=-sqrt{2}tan x=frac{1-tan x}{sqrt{2}}implies2tan x=tan x-1impliestan x=-1\
boxed{x=npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

Step 2
$$
tan x=1-sqrt{2}sec x=frac{-sec x}{sqrt{2}}implies2sec x-sqrt{2}=sec x\
impliessec x=sqrt{2}impliesboxed{x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}}
$$

$$
x=npi-frac{pi}{4}quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\implies bigg[x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}text{ or }x=2npi+frac{3pi}{4}bigg]quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\
implies boxed{x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

In my attempt why do I need Step 2 to get the complete solution ?



Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





Solve $sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1$




I understand it can be very easily solved by expanding in terms of $sin x$ and $cos x$, gives $x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}$. But, what if I do the following:
$$
sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1\
text{Differentiating}impliessqrt{2}sec xtan x+sec^2 x=0impliessqrt{2}tan x+sec x=0
$$

Step 1
$$
sec x=-sqrt{2}tan x=frac{1-tan x}{sqrt{2}}implies2tan x=tan x-1impliestan x=-1\
boxed{x=npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

Step 2
$$
tan x=1-sqrt{2}sec x=frac{-sec x}{sqrt{2}}implies2sec x-sqrt{2}=sec x\
impliessec x=sqrt{2}impliesboxed{x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}}
$$

$$
x=npi-frac{pi}{4}quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\implies bigg[x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}text{ or }x=2npi+frac{3pi}{4}bigg]quad&quad x=2npipmfrac{pi}{4}\
implies boxed{x=2npi-frac{pi}{4}}
$$

In my attempt why do I need Step 2 to get the complete solution ?



Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?







trigonometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 3 '18 at 10:19







ss1729

















asked Dec 3 '18 at 10:01









ss1729ss1729

1,9671923




1,9671923








  • 6




    $begingroup$
    This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:12










  • $begingroup$
    Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:49








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:59






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
    $endgroup$
    – ss1729
    Dec 3 '18 at 13:33














  • 6




    $begingroup$
    This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:12










  • $begingroup$
    Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
    $endgroup$
    – gimusi
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:49








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
    $endgroup$
    – platty
    Dec 3 '18 at 10:59






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
    $endgroup$
    – ss1729
    Dec 3 '18 at 13:33








6




6




$begingroup$
This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 3 '18 at 10:12




$begingroup$
This is not an answer to your question, but I'd note that the differentiation step is not valid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2 + 1 = 2$. Differentiating should give $2x = 0$, so $x = 0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are. I am not sure why it seems to work out in this case.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 3 '18 at 10:12












$begingroup$
Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
$endgroup$
– gimusi
Dec 3 '18 at 10:49






$begingroup$
Please let me know if my answer with an alternative method could be useful, otherwise I'll delete that.
$endgroup$
– gimusi
Dec 3 '18 at 10:49






2




2




$begingroup$
Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 3 '18 at 10:59




$begingroup$
Ah, I think I see why it happens to work out. It turns out that at $2 pi n - pi/4$, the equation $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ is actually true. So in a way, you end up using the fact that your answer works to derive it, in a sort of circular argument. Of course, like I mentioned above, this method is invalid, but now we know why it appears to work.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 3 '18 at 10:59




2




2




$begingroup$
@platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
$endgroup$
– ss1729
Dec 3 '18 at 13:33




$begingroup$
@platty thanx very much. you could post it as answer though !
$endgroup$
– ss1729
Dec 3 '18 at 13:33










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

The differentiation step is invalid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2+1=2$. Differentiating should give $2x=0$, so $x=0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are.



It turns out that, by coincidence, $sqrt{2} tanleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) + secleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) = 0$, i.e. $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ does hold at the particular value of $x$ you want to find. As such, your manipulations are technically "valid" in that everything you say is true, but only because the answer that you are trying to find makes these expressions true. The argument, however, is circular, so the proof fails (you are starting by presuming what you want to show, i.e. $x = 2 pi n - frac{pi}{4}$). If, for example, the original question were $sqrt{2} sec x + tan x = 0$, it should be apparent that this method fails.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    HINT



    As noticed we can't use differentiation to obtain the result indeed in general



    $$f'(x)=g'(x) not Rightarrow f(x)=g(x)$$



    consider for example the simple case



    $$2x+3=1 to 2=0$$



    I suggest to use tangent half-angle identities by $t = tan frac x2$ to obtain



    $$sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1 iff sqrt{2}frac{1+t^2}{1-t^2}+frac{2t}{1-t^2}=1$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
      $endgroup$
      – Martin R
      Dec 3 '18 at 10:39










    • $begingroup$
      @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
      $endgroup$
      – gimusi
      Dec 3 '18 at 10:40










    • $begingroup$
      No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
      $endgroup$
      – DavidG
      Dec 3 '18 at 10:41






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
      $endgroup$
      – Martin R
      Dec 3 '18 at 10:43










    • $begingroup$
      Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
      $endgroup$
      – DavidG
      Dec 3 '18 at 10:47











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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%2f3023863%2fsolve-sqrt2-sec-x-tan-x-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    The differentiation step is invalid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2+1=2$. Differentiating should give $2x=0$, so $x=0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are.



    It turns out that, by coincidence, $sqrt{2} tanleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) + secleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) = 0$, i.e. $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ does hold at the particular value of $x$ you want to find. As such, your manipulations are technically "valid" in that everything you say is true, but only because the answer that you are trying to find makes these expressions true. The argument, however, is circular, so the proof fails (you are starting by presuming what you want to show, i.e. $x = 2 pi n - frac{pi}{4}$). If, for example, the original question were $sqrt{2} sec x + tan x = 0$, it should be apparent that this method fails.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      2












      $begingroup$

      The differentiation step is invalid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2+1=2$. Differentiating should give $2x=0$, so $x=0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are.



      It turns out that, by coincidence, $sqrt{2} tanleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) + secleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) = 0$, i.e. $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ does hold at the particular value of $x$ you want to find. As such, your manipulations are technically "valid" in that everything you say is true, but only because the answer that you are trying to find makes these expressions true. The argument, however, is circular, so the proof fails (you are starting by presuming what you want to show, i.e. $x = 2 pi n - frac{pi}{4}$). If, for example, the original question were $sqrt{2} sec x + tan x = 0$, it should be apparent that this method fails.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        The differentiation step is invalid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2+1=2$. Differentiating should give $2x=0$, so $x=0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are.



        It turns out that, by coincidence, $sqrt{2} tanleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) + secleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) = 0$, i.e. $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ does hold at the particular value of $x$ you want to find. As such, your manipulations are technically "valid" in that everything you say is true, but only because the answer that you are trying to find makes these expressions true. The argument, however, is circular, so the proof fails (you are starting by presuming what you want to show, i.e. $x = 2 pi n - frac{pi}{4}$). If, for example, the original question were $sqrt{2} sec x + tan x = 0$, it should be apparent that this method fails.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        The differentiation step is invalid. Try to apply it to something like $x^2+1=2$. Differentiating should give $2x=0$, so $x=0$ has to be the solution. Clearly this isn't correct. The problem here is that you are trying to solve for a specific value of $x$; differentiating the two sides indicates that you are treating the quantities as functions, rather than the numbers they are.



        It turns out that, by coincidence, $sqrt{2} tanleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) + secleft(2npi - frac{pi}{4} right) = 0$, i.e. $sqrt{2} tan x + sec x = 0$ does hold at the particular value of $x$ you want to find. As such, your manipulations are technically "valid" in that everything you say is true, but only because the answer that you are trying to find makes these expressions true. The argument, however, is circular, so the proof fails (you are starting by presuming what you want to show, i.e. $x = 2 pi n - frac{pi}{4}$). If, for example, the original question were $sqrt{2} sec x + tan x = 0$, it should be apparent that this method fails.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 3 '18 at 19:13









        plattyplatty

        3,370320




        3,370320























            0












            $begingroup$

            HINT



            As noticed we can't use differentiation to obtain the result indeed in general



            $$f'(x)=g'(x) not Rightarrow f(x)=g(x)$$



            consider for example the simple case



            $$2x+3=1 to 2=0$$



            I suggest to use tangent half-angle identities by $t = tan frac x2$ to obtain



            $$sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1 iff sqrt{2}frac{1+t^2}{1-t^2}+frac{2t}{1-t^2}=1$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
              $endgroup$
              – gimusi
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:40










            • $begingroup$
              No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:41






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:43










            • $begingroup$
              Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:47
















            0












            $begingroup$

            HINT



            As noticed we can't use differentiation to obtain the result indeed in general



            $$f'(x)=g'(x) not Rightarrow f(x)=g(x)$$



            consider for example the simple case



            $$2x+3=1 to 2=0$$



            I suggest to use tangent half-angle identities by $t = tan frac x2$ to obtain



            $$sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1 iff sqrt{2}frac{1+t^2}{1-t^2}+frac{2t}{1-t^2}=1$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
              $endgroup$
              – gimusi
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:40










            • $begingroup$
              No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:41






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:43










            • $begingroup$
              Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:47














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            HINT



            As noticed we can't use differentiation to obtain the result indeed in general



            $$f'(x)=g'(x) not Rightarrow f(x)=g(x)$$



            consider for example the simple case



            $$2x+3=1 to 2=0$$



            I suggest to use tangent half-angle identities by $t = tan frac x2$ to obtain



            $$sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1 iff sqrt{2}frac{1+t^2}{1-t^2}+frac{2t}{1-t^2}=1$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            HINT



            As noticed we can't use differentiation to obtain the result indeed in general



            $$f'(x)=g'(x) not Rightarrow f(x)=g(x)$$



            consider for example the simple case



            $$2x+3=1 to 2=0$$



            I suggest to use tangent half-angle identities by $t = tan frac x2$ to obtain



            $$sqrt{2}sec x+tan x=1 iff sqrt{2}frac{1+t^2}{1-t^2}+frac{2t}{1-t^2}=1$$







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Dec 3 '18 at 10:43

























            answered Dec 3 '18 at 10:20









            gimusigimusi

            92.8k84494




            92.8k84494








            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
              $endgroup$
              – gimusi
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:40










            • $begingroup$
              No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:41






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:43










            • $begingroup$
              Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:47














            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
              $endgroup$
              – gimusi
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:40










            • $begingroup$
              No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:41






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
              $endgroup$
              – Martin R
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:43










            • $begingroup$
              Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
              $endgroup$
              – DavidG
              Dec 3 '18 at 10:47








            3




            3




            $begingroup$
            Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
            $endgroup$
            – Martin R
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:39




            $begingroup$
            Is this an answer to the question “Can someone give a proper explanation to my attempt ?” ?
            $endgroup$
            – Martin R
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:39












            $begingroup$
            @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
            $endgroup$
            – gimusi
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:40




            $begingroup$
            @MartinR Yes you are right, I add some comment on that.
            $endgroup$
            – gimusi
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:40












            $begingroup$
            No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
            $endgroup$
            – DavidG
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:41




            $begingroup$
            No, but it’s a hint as labelled by ‘HINT’
            $endgroup$
            – DavidG
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:41




            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
            $endgroup$
            – Martin R
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:43




            $begingroup$
            @DavidG: OP explicitly states that (s)he knows how to solve the equation, but has a problem with an alternative approach, and that is what the question is about. I would expect that a >80K user reads the whole question before posting, and answered accordingly
            $endgroup$
            – Martin R
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:43












            $begingroup$
            Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
            $endgroup$
            – DavidG
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:47




            $begingroup$
            Fair enough. Mistakes do happen.
            $endgroup$
            – DavidG
            Dec 3 '18 at 10:47


















            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%2f3023863%2fsolve-sqrt2-sec-x-tan-x-1%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)

            How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents