Proofs of $cos(x+y) = cos xcos y - sin x sin y$How can I understand and prove the “sum and difference formulas” in trigonometry?Different definitions of trigonometric functionsHow do I prove that $cosleft(2xright)=1-2sin^2left(xright)$?How do we find specific values of sin and cos given the series definitionHow to show that $cos(x+y)=cos(x)cos(y)−sin(x)sin(y)$ by using power series?Show that the equation $cos(sin x)=sin(cos x)$ has no real solutions.Solve for $sin^2(x) = 3cos^2(x)$Convergence of $sum_n |fraccos(3^n)n|$Proof: $sinleft(fracx-x_02right)sinleft(fracx-x_12right) = frac12cos fracx_1-x_02 - frac12cos(x-fracx_1+x_02)$How does one show sin(x) is bounded using the power series?Using the IVP definition of $cos$ and $sin$, how can we show that $cos^2(x)+sin^2(x) = 1$ without any “magic”?Transition from Introductory Proofs/Logic Course to the Proofs in Rudin's Principles of AnalysisHow can we show $cos^6x+sin^6x=1-3sin^2x cos^2x$?Is there a natural way to prove trig identities also hold for complex numbers?General solution of $(sqrt3 - 1)sintheta + (sqrt3 + 1)costheta =2 $

How old is Nick Fury?

What is the tangent at a sharp point on a curve?

Determine voltage drop over 10G resistors with cheap multimeter

10 year ban after applying for a UK student visa

What (if any) is the reason to buy in small local stores?

Isn't the word "experience" wrongly used in this context?

What will the Frenchman say?

Why is this tree refusing to shed its dead leaves?

Have any astronauts/cosmonauts died in space?

Fair way to split coins

Did Nintendo change its mind about 68000 SNES?

Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Why does Surtur say that Thor is Asgard's doom?

Exposing a company lying about themselves in a tightly knit industry: Is my career at risk on the long run?

How to understand 「僕は誰より彼女が好きなんだ。」

Could any one tell what PN is this Chip? Thanks~

Nested Dynamic SOQL Query

Jem'Hadar, something strange about their life expectancy

What is it called when someone votes for an option that's not their first choice?

When did hardware antialiasing start being available?

What are the rules for concealing thieves' tools (or items in general)?

Do I need to convey a moral for each of my blog post?

What favor did Moody owe Dumbledore?



Proofs of $cos(x+y) = cos xcos y - sin x sin y$


How can I understand and prove the “sum and difference formulas” in trigonometry?Different definitions of trigonometric functionsHow do I prove that $cosleft(2xright)=1-2sin^2left(xright)$?How do we find specific values of sin and cos given the series definitionHow to show that $cos(x+y)=cos(x)cos(y)−sin(x)sin(y)$ by using power series?Show that the equation $cos(sin x)=sin(cos x)$ has no real solutions.Solve for $sin^2(x) = 3cos^2(x)$Convergence of $sum_n |fraccos(3^n)n|$Proof: $sinleft(fracx-x_02right)sinleft(fracx-x_12right) = frac12cos fracx_1-x_02 - frac12cos(x-fracx_1+x_02)$How does one show sin(x) is bounded using the power series?Using the IVP definition of $cos$ and $sin$, how can we show that $cos^2(x)+sin^2(x) = 1$ without any “magic”?Transition from Introductory Proofs/Logic Course to the Proofs in Rudin's Principles of AnalysisHow can we show $cos^6x+sin^6x=1-3sin^2x cos^2x$?Is there a natural way to prove trig identities also hold for complex numbers?General solution of $(sqrt3 - 1)sintheta + (sqrt3 + 1)costheta =2 $













3












$begingroup$


Define $sin x $ and $cos x$ via their infinite series:
$$
sin x = sum_n (-1)^nfracx^2n+1(2n+1)!, qquad
cos x = sum_n (-1)^n fracx^2n(2n)!.
$$
Is there a short, clever proof that $cos(x+y) = cos x cos y - sin x sin y$ for all real $x,y$? I can prove it using product series, or by showing that both sides (with $y$ fixed) are solutions of $f''(x) = -f(x)$, $f(0) = cos y$, $f'(0) = - sin y$. Does anyone know other (preferably slick!) proofs?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe Z.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:12










  • $begingroup$
    Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
    $endgroup$
    – dtldarek
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:24










  • $begingroup$
    Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:25






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
    $endgroup$
    – André Nicolas
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:46











  • $begingroup$
    ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
    $endgroup$
    – Lord_Farin
    Apr 2 '13 at 21:39















3












$begingroup$


Define $sin x $ and $cos x$ via their infinite series:
$$
sin x = sum_n (-1)^nfracx^2n+1(2n+1)!, qquad
cos x = sum_n (-1)^n fracx^2n(2n)!.
$$
Is there a short, clever proof that $cos(x+y) = cos x cos y - sin x sin y$ for all real $x,y$? I can prove it using product series, or by showing that both sides (with $y$ fixed) are solutions of $f''(x) = -f(x)$, $f(0) = cos y$, $f'(0) = - sin y$. Does anyone know other (preferably slick!) proofs?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe Z.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:12










  • $begingroup$
    Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
    $endgroup$
    – dtldarek
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:24










  • $begingroup$
    Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:25






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
    $endgroup$
    – André Nicolas
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:46











  • $begingroup$
    ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
    $endgroup$
    – Lord_Farin
    Apr 2 '13 at 21:39













3












3








3


2



$begingroup$


Define $sin x $ and $cos x$ via their infinite series:
$$
sin x = sum_n (-1)^nfracx^2n+1(2n+1)!, qquad
cos x = sum_n (-1)^n fracx^2n(2n)!.
$$
Is there a short, clever proof that $cos(x+y) = cos x cos y - sin x sin y$ for all real $x,y$? I can prove it using product series, or by showing that both sides (with $y$ fixed) are solutions of $f''(x) = -f(x)$, $f(0) = cos y$, $f'(0) = - sin y$. Does anyone know other (preferably slick!) proofs?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Define $sin x $ and $cos x$ via their infinite series:
$$
sin x = sum_n (-1)^nfracx^2n+1(2n+1)!, qquad
cos x = sum_n (-1)^n fracx^2n(2n)!.
$$
Is there a short, clever proof that $cos(x+y) = cos x cos y - sin x sin y$ for all real $x,y$? I can prove it using product series, or by showing that both sides (with $y$ fixed) are solutions of $f''(x) = -f(x)$, $f(0) = cos y$, $f'(0) = - sin y$. Does anyone know other (preferably slick!) proofs?







real-analysis trigonometry






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Apr 2 '13 at 20:07









Umberto P.Umberto P.

39.9k13267




39.9k13267











  • $begingroup$
    There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe Z.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:12










  • $begingroup$
    Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
    $endgroup$
    – dtldarek
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:24










  • $begingroup$
    Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:25






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
    $endgroup$
    – André Nicolas
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:46











  • $begingroup$
    ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
    $endgroup$
    – Lord_Farin
    Apr 2 '13 at 21:39
















  • $begingroup$
    There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe Z.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:12










  • $begingroup$
    Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
    $endgroup$
    – dtldarek
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:24










  • $begingroup$
    Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:25






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
    $endgroup$
    – André Nicolas
    Apr 2 '13 at 20:46











  • $begingroup$
    ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
    $endgroup$
    – Lord_Farin
    Apr 2 '13 at 21:39















$begingroup$
There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
$endgroup$
– Joe Z.
Apr 2 '13 at 20:12




$begingroup$
There's probably a proof involving complex numbers.
$endgroup$
– Joe Z.
Apr 2 '13 at 20:12












$begingroup$
Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
$endgroup$
– dtldarek
Apr 2 '13 at 20:24




$begingroup$
Not exactly what you want, but still, you might be interested in the geometric proof.
$endgroup$
– dtldarek
Apr 2 '13 at 20:24












$begingroup$
Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
Apr 2 '13 at 20:25




$begingroup$
Allow me to clarify. I'm wondering if there is a proof using real analytic methods (e.g. power series). I'm not assuming anything about $sin$ and $cos$ other than what can be derived from their definitions as series.
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
Apr 2 '13 at 20:25




2




2




$begingroup$
I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
$endgroup$
– André Nicolas
Apr 2 '13 at 20:46





$begingroup$
I happen to have answered a very similar question today. You will find there in particular a proof of the two Addition Laws, rather condensed, using the series definition.
$endgroup$
– André Nicolas
Apr 2 '13 at 20:46













$begingroup$
ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
$endgroup$
– Lord_Farin
Apr 2 '13 at 21:39




$begingroup$
ProofWiki features a geometric proof. As a PW herald, I'd like to invite any users to add their proofs (as far as they're different from the present quadruple) to it as well!
$endgroup$
– Lord_Farin
Apr 2 '13 at 21:39










8 Answers
8






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

New answer to an old question. This one, maybe the slickiest of them all, is due to Erhard Schmidt.

Define
$$f(t)=cos(x+y-t)cos(t)-sin(x+y-t)sin(t).$$
Verify $f'(t)=0$, hence $f$ is constant. Now the desired angle sum identity follows from $f(0)=f(y)$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    4












    $begingroup$

    One way is to use the fact that
    $$cos(theta) = dfrace^i theta+e^-i theta2$$
    $$cos(x+y) = dfrace^i(x+y)+e^-i(x+y)2 = left(dfrace^ix+e^-ix2 right) left(dfrace^iy+e^-iy2right) - left(dfrace^ix-e^-ix2i right) left(dfrace^iy-e^-iy2iright)$$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
      $endgroup$
      – Umberto P.
      Apr 2 '13 at 20:20










    • $begingroup$
      I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
      $endgroup$
      – Joe Z.
      Apr 2 '13 at 20:21










    • $begingroup$
      look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
      $endgroup$
      – tom
      Apr 2 '13 at 21:52











    • $begingroup$
      @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
      $endgroup$
      – Umberto P.
      Apr 3 '13 at 1:49


















    3












    $begingroup$

    This was addressed in the question already. I leave it so that the method is fully explained.



    LEMMA Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$ and $f'(0)=0$; $f(0)=0$. Then $f$ is identically zero everywhere.



    P We have that $$f''+f=0$$ Then $$f'f''+ff'=0$$ or $$(f')^2+f^2=C$$



    But the initial conditions force $f'^2+f^2=0$ everywhere, which means $fequiv 0$. $blacktriangle$.



    PROP Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$, and $f'(0)=a$, $f(0)=b$. Then $$f=asin+bcos $$



    P Let $g=f-asin+bcos$. Then $g''+g=0$ and $g'(0)=0$, $g(0)=0$. The lemma implies $gequiv 0$, so that $f=asin+bcos$. $blacktriangle$.




    Differentiate with respect to one variable and use the uniqueness of the solution of a second degree ODE with initial conditions.



    That is, your cosine on the left vetifies $$f''+f=0$$ and $f'(0)=–sin y$, $f''(0)=cos y$. Then it must coincide with the unique solution $$f'(0) sin+f(0)cos$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      This solution was addressed in the question.
      $endgroup$
      – Umberto P.
      Apr 3 '13 at 1:55










    • $begingroup$
      @UmbertoP. I just realized.
      $endgroup$
      – Pedro Tamaroff
      Apr 3 '13 at 17:07


















    1












    $begingroup$

    The way I learned it as a kid was geometric, and probably looked like the proof seen here on Wikipedia.



    The segment $OP$ has length $1$. We have the $sin(alpha + beta) = PB = PR + RB = cos(alpha) sin(beta) + sin(alpha) cos(beta)$.



    Then, to prove the cosine identity we can use that $cos(alpha + beta) = sin(alpha + beta + pi/2)$ and use the sine identity.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$




















      1












      $begingroup$

      I always had a hard time to memorize that formula.
      But actually, that's not really needed, because there it is an easy way to reconstruct it from the from the laws of exponentiation applied to complex exponentiation:
      $$e^i(x + y) = e^ix cdot e^iy.$$



      Using the complex multiplication rule $operatornameRe(ab) = operatornameRe(a)operatornameRe(b) - operatornameIm(a)operatornameIm(b)$, taking the real part gives



      $$operatornameRe(e^i(x + y)) = operatornameRe(e^ix)operatornameRe(e^iy) - operatornameIm(e^ix)operatornameIm(e^iy).$$



      So by $cos(x) = operatornameRe(e^ix)$ and $sin(x) = operatornameIm(e^ix)$
      $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y).$$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$




















        1












        $begingroup$

        Let $vecu,vecvinmathbbR^2$ unitary vectors such that
        $$
        vecu=big(cos(x),sin(x)big)quad mbox and quad vecv=big(cos(-y),sin(-y)big)
        $$
        Here $x$ and $-y$ are the smallest angle formed between the x-axis and the vectors $vecu$ and $vecv$ respectively. Then
        beginalign
        cosbig( x+ybig) = & cosbig( x-(-y)big)\
        = & fracvecubulletvecvcdot \
        = & vecubulletvecv\
        = & cos(x)cdotcos(-y)+sin(x)cdotsin(-y)\
        = & cos(x)cdotcos(y)-sin(x)cdotsin(y)\
        endalign






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$




















          0












          $begingroup$

          For variety, here is a different proof. Unfortunately it might be considered circular since it relies on differentiation of trig functions. But maybe you know their derivatives without using this identity, if say $sin$ and $cos$ have been defined by their Taylor series.



          Apply $fracd^2dx^2$ to each side (viewing $y$ as some constant), and you see that each side a solution to $fracd^2dx^2f(x)=-f(x)$



          Both sides are in agreement at $x=-y$. Also the first derivatives of each side are in agreement at $x=-y$. Therefore they are the same expression.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            That solution was mentioned in the question.
            $endgroup$
            – Umberto P.
            Apr 3 '13 at 1:48


















          0












          $begingroup$

          $$beginarray rcl
          cos(x + y) + i sin(x + y)& = & e^i(x + y) \
          &=& e^ixe^iy \
          &=& (cos(x) + isin(x))(cos(y) + isin(y)) \
          &=& (cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)) + i(sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)) \
          endarray$$



          Equating real and imaginary parts you get



          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)$$
          $$sin(x + y) = sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
            $endgroup$
            – Umberto P.
            Mar 13 at 18:59











          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%2f349435%2fproofs-of-cosxy-cos-x-cos-y-sin-x-sin-y%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          8 Answers
          8






          active

          oldest

          votes








          8 Answers
          8






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          New answer to an old question. This one, maybe the slickiest of them all, is due to Erhard Schmidt.

          Define
          $$f(t)=cos(x+y-t)cos(t)-sin(x+y-t)sin(t).$$
          Verify $f'(t)=0$, hence $f$ is constant. Now the desired angle sum identity follows from $f(0)=f(y)$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$

















            1












            $begingroup$

            New answer to an old question. This one, maybe the slickiest of them all, is due to Erhard Schmidt.

            Define
            $$f(t)=cos(x+y-t)cos(t)-sin(x+y-t)sin(t).$$
            Verify $f'(t)=0$, hence $f$ is constant. Now the desired angle sum identity follows from $f(0)=f(y)$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$















              1












              1








              1





              $begingroup$

              New answer to an old question. This one, maybe the slickiest of them all, is due to Erhard Schmidt.

              Define
              $$f(t)=cos(x+y-t)cos(t)-sin(x+y-t)sin(t).$$
              Verify $f'(t)=0$, hence $f$ is constant. Now the desired angle sum identity follows from $f(0)=f(y)$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              New answer to an old question. This one, maybe the slickiest of them all, is due to Erhard Schmidt.

              Define
              $$f(t)=cos(x+y-t)cos(t)-sin(x+y-t)sin(t).$$
              Verify $f'(t)=0$, hence $f$ is constant. Now the desired angle sum identity follows from $f(0)=f(y)$







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Nov 13 '18 at 12:03









              Michael HoppeMichael Hoppe

              11.2k31837




              11.2k31837





















                  4












                  $begingroup$

                  One way is to use the fact that
                  $$cos(theta) = dfrace^i theta+e^-i theta2$$
                  $$cos(x+y) = dfrace^i(x+y)+e^-i(x+y)2 = left(dfrace^ix+e^-ix2 right) left(dfrace^iy+e^-iy2right) - left(dfrace^ix-e^-ix2i right) left(dfrace^iy-e^-iy2iright)$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$












                  • $begingroup$
                    Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:20










                  • $begingroup$
                    I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Joe Z.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:21










                  • $begingroup$
                    look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                    $endgroup$
                    – tom
                    Apr 2 '13 at 21:52











                  • $begingroup$
                    @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:49















                  4












                  $begingroup$

                  One way is to use the fact that
                  $$cos(theta) = dfrace^i theta+e^-i theta2$$
                  $$cos(x+y) = dfrace^i(x+y)+e^-i(x+y)2 = left(dfrace^ix+e^-ix2 right) left(dfrace^iy+e^-iy2right) - left(dfrace^ix-e^-ix2i right) left(dfrace^iy-e^-iy2iright)$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$












                  • $begingroup$
                    Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:20










                  • $begingroup$
                    I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Joe Z.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:21










                  • $begingroup$
                    look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                    $endgroup$
                    – tom
                    Apr 2 '13 at 21:52











                  • $begingroup$
                    @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:49













                  4












                  4








                  4





                  $begingroup$

                  One way is to use the fact that
                  $$cos(theta) = dfrace^i theta+e^-i theta2$$
                  $$cos(x+y) = dfrace^i(x+y)+e^-i(x+y)2 = left(dfrace^ix+e^-ix2 right) left(dfrace^iy+e^-iy2right) - left(dfrace^ix-e^-ix2i right) left(dfrace^iy-e^-iy2iright)$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  One way is to use the fact that
                  $$cos(theta) = dfrace^i theta+e^-i theta2$$
                  $$cos(x+y) = dfrace^i(x+y)+e^-i(x+y)2 = left(dfrace^ix+e^-ix2 right) left(dfrace^iy+e^-iy2right) - left(dfrace^ix-e^-ix2i right) left(dfrace^iy-e^-iy2iright)$$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Apr 2 '13 at 20:14







                  user17762


















                  • $begingroup$
                    Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:20










                  • $begingroup$
                    I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Joe Z.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:21










                  • $begingroup$
                    look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                    $endgroup$
                    – tom
                    Apr 2 '13 at 21:52











                  • $begingroup$
                    @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:49
















                  • $begingroup$
                    Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:20










                  • $begingroup$
                    I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Joe Z.
                    Apr 2 '13 at 20:21










                  • $begingroup$
                    look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                    $endgroup$
                    – tom
                    Apr 2 '13 at 21:52











                  • $begingroup$
                    @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:49















                  $begingroup$
                  Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 2 '13 at 20:20




                  $begingroup$
                  Can $e^imath x$ be defined without series? The proofs that $e^imath(x+y) = e^imath xe^imath y$ seem to involve product series or uniqueness of ODE, which I'm seeing if I can avoid.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 2 '13 at 20:20












                  $begingroup$
                  I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                  $endgroup$
                  – Joe Z.
                  Apr 2 '13 at 20:21




                  $begingroup$
                  I don't believe it can. Are you looking for, say, an elementary geometry proof?
                  $endgroup$
                  – Joe Z.
                  Apr 2 '13 at 20:21












                  $begingroup$
                  look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                  $endgroup$
                  – tom
                  Apr 2 '13 at 21:52





                  $begingroup$
                  look at Mertens' theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_product and you need only case when both series are absolutely convergent, which should be easier to prove. If I can remember right you will need that absolutely convergent series can be summed in any order.
                  $endgroup$
                  – tom
                  Apr 2 '13 at 21:52













                  $begingroup$
                  @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 3 '13 at 1:49




                  $begingroup$
                  @tom: I know the product series proof as stated in the question. I'm looking for novel proofs.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 3 '13 at 1:49











                  3












                  $begingroup$

                  This was addressed in the question already. I leave it so that the method is fully explained.



                  LEMMA Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$ and $f'(0)=0$; $f(0)=0$. Then $f$ is identically zero everywhere.



                  P We have that $$f''+f=0$$ Then $$f'f''+ff'=0$$ or $$(f')^2+f^2=C$$



                  But the initial conditions force $f'^2+f^2=0$ everywhere, which means $fequiv 0$. $blacktriangle$.



                  PROP Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$, and $f'(0)=a$, $f(0)=b$. Then $$f=asin+bcos $$



                  P Let $g=f-asin+bcos$. Then $g''+g=0$ and $g'(0)=0$, $g(0)=0$. The lemma implies $gequiv 0$, so that $f=asin+bcos$. $blacktriangle$.




                  Differentiate with respect to one variable and use the uniqueness of the solution of a second degree ODE with initial conditions.



                  That is, your cosine on the left vetifies $$f''+f=0$$ and $f'(0)=–sin y$, $f''(0)=cos y$. Then it must coincide with the unique solution $$f'(0) sin+f(0)cos$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$












                  • $begingroup$
                    This solution was addressed in the question.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:55










                  • $begingroup$
                    @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Pedro Tamaroff
                    Apr 3 '13 at 17:07















                  3












                  $begingroup$

                  This was addressed in the question already. I leave it so that the method is fully explained.



                  LEMMA Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$ and $f'(0)=0$; $f(0)=0$. Then $f$ is identically zero everywhere.



                  P We have that $$f''+f=0$$ Then $$f'f''+ff'=0$$ or $$(f')^2+f^2=C$$



                  But the initial conditions force $f'^2+f^2=0$ everywhere, which means $fequiv 0$. $blacktriangle$.



                  PROP Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$, and $f'(0)=a$, $f(0)=b$. Then $$f=asin+bcos $$



                  P Let $g=f-asin+bcos$. Then $g''+g=0$ and $g'(0)=0$, $g(0)=0$. The lemma implies $gequiv 0$, so that $f=asin+bcos$. $blacktriangle$.




                  Differentiate with respect to one variable and use the uniqueness of the solution of a second degree ODE with initial conditions.



                  That is, your cosine on the left vetifies $$f''+f=0$$ and $f'(0)=–sin y$, $f''(0)=cos y$. Then it must coincide with the unique solution $$f'(0) sin+f(0)cos$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$












                  • $begingroup$
                    This solution was addressed in the question.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:55










                  • $begingroup$
                    @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Pedro Tamaroff
                    Apr 3 '13 at 17:07













                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  This was addressed in the question already. I leave it so that the method is fully explained.



                  LEMMA Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$ and $f'(0)=0$; $f(0)=0$. Then $f$ is identically zero everywhere.



                  P We have that $$f''+f=0$$ Then $$f'f''+ff'=0$$ or $$(f')^2+f^2=C$$



                  But the initial conditions force $f'^2+f^2=0$ everywhere, which means $fequiv 0$. $blacktriangle$.



                  PROP Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$, and $f'(0)=a$, $f(0)=b$. Then $$f=asin+bcos $$



                  P Let $g=f-asin+bcos$. Then $g''+g=0$ and $g'(0)=0$, $g(0)=0$. The lemma implies $gequiv 0$, so that $f=asin+bcos$. $blacktriangle$.




                  Differentiate with respect to one variable and use the uniqueness of the solution of a second degree ODE with initial conditions.



                  That is, your cosine on the left vetifies $$f''+f=0$$ and $f'(0)=–sin y$, $f''(0)=cos y$. Then it must coincide with the unique solution $$f'(0) sin+f(0)cos$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  This was addressed in the question already. I leave it so that the method is fully explained.



                  LEMMA Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$ and $f'(0)=0$; $f(0)=0$. Then $f$ is identically zero everywhere.



                  P We have that $$f''+f=0$$ Then $$f'f''+ff'=0$$ or $$(f')^2+f^2=C$$



                  But the initial conditions force $f'^2+f^2=0$ everywhere, which means $fequiv 0$. $blacktriangle$.



                  PROP Let $f$ be a function with second derivative everywhere such that $f''+f=0$, and $f'(0)=a$, $f(0)=b$. Then $$f=asin+bcos $$



                  P Let $g=f-asin+bcos$. Then $g''+g=0$ and $g'(0)=0$, $g(0)=0$. The lemma implies $gequiv 0$, so that $f=asin+bcos$. $blacktriangle$.




                  Differentiate with respect to one variable and use the uniqueness of the solution of a second degree ODE with initial conditions.



                  That is, your cosine on the left vetifies $$f''+f=0$$ and $f'(0)=–sin y$, $f''(0)=cos y$. Then it must coincide with the unique solution $$f'(0) sin+f(0)cos$$







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Apr 3 '13 at 17:12


























                  community wiki





                  4 revs
                  Peter Tamaroff












                  • $begingroup$
                    This solution was addressed in the question.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:55










                  • $begingroup$
                    @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Pedro Tamaroff
                    Apr 3 '13 at 17:07
















                  • $begingroup$
                    This solution was addressed in the question.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Umberto P.
                    Apr 3 '13 at 1:55










                  • $begingroup$
                    @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Pedro Tamaroff
                    Apr 3 '13 at 17:07















                  $begingroup$
                  This solution was addressed in the question.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 3 '13 at 1:55




                  $begingroup$
                  This solution was addressed in the question.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Umberto P.
                  Apr 3 '13 at 1:55












                  $begingroup$
                  @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Pedro Tamaroff
                  Apr 3 '13 at 17:07




                  $begingroup$
                  @UmbertoP. I just realized.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Pedro Tamaroff
                  Apr 3 '13 at 17:07











                  1












                  $begingroup$

                  The way I learned it as a kid was geometric, and probably looked like the proof seen here on Wikipedia.



                  The segment $OP$ has length $1$. We have the $sin(alpha + beta) = PB = PR + RB = cos(alpha) sin(beta) + sin(alpha) cos(beta)$.



                  Then, to prove the cosine identity we can use that $cos(alpha + beta) = sin(alpha + beta + pi/2)$ and use the sine identity.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$

















                    1












                    $begingroup$

                    The way I learned it as a kid was geometric, and probably looked like the proof seen here on Wikipedia.



                    The segment $OP$ has length $1$. We have the $sin(alpha + beta) = PB = PR + RB = cos(alpha) sin(beta) + sin(alpha) cos(beta)$.



                    Then, to prove the cosine identity we can use that $cos(alpha + beta) = sin(alpha + beta + pi/2)$ and use the sine identity.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$















                      1












                      1








                      1





                      $begingroup$

                      The way I learned it as a kid was geometric, and probably looked like the proof seen here on Wikipedia.



                      The segment $OP$ has length $1$. We have the $sin(alpha + beta) = PB = PR + RB = cos(alpha) sin(beta) + sin(alpha) cos(beta)$.



                      Then, to prove the cosine identity we can use that $cos(alpha + beta) = sin(alpha + beta + pi/2)$ and use the sine identity.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      The way I learned it as a kid was geometric, and probably looked like the proof seen here on Wikipedia.



                      The segment $OP$ has length $1$. We have the $sin(alpha + beta) = PB = PR + RB = cos(alpha) sin(beta) + sin(alpha) cos(beta)$.



                      Then, to prove the cosine identity we can use that $cos(alpha + beta) = sin(alpha + beta + pi/2)$ and use the sine identity.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Apr 2 '13 at 20:22









                      Christopher A. WongChristopher A. Wong

                      16.6k33159




                      16.6k33159





















                          1












                          $begingroup$

                          I always had a hard time to memorize that formula.
                          But actually, that's not really needed, because there it is an easy way to reconstruct it from the from the laws of exponentiation applied to complex exponentiation:
                          $$e^i(x + y) = e^ix cdot e^iy.$$



                          Using the complex multiplication rule $operatornameRe(ab) = operatornameRe(a)operatornameRe(b) - operatornameIm(a)operatornameIm(b)$, taking the real part gives



                          $$operatornameRe(e^i(x + y)) = operatornameRe(e^ix)operatornameRe(e^iy) - operatornameIm(e^ix)operatornameIm(e^iy).$$



                          So by $cos(x) = operatornameRe(e^ix)$ and $sin(x) = operatornameIm(e^ix)$
                          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y).$$






                          share|cite|improve this answer











                          $endgroup$

















                            1












                            $begingroup$

                            I always had a hard time to memorize that formula.
                            But actually, that's not really needed, because there it is an easy way to reconstruct it from the from the laws of exponentiation applied to complex exponentiation:
                            $$e^i(x + y) = e^ix cdot e^iy.$$



                            Using the complex multiplication rule $operatornameRe(ab) = operatornameRe(a)operatornameRe(b) - operatornameIm(a)operatornameIm(b)$, taking the real part gives



                            $$operatornameRe(e^i(x + y)) = operatornameRe(e^ix)operatornameRe(e^iy) - operatornameIm(e^ix)operatornameIm(e^iy).$$



                            So by $cos(x) = operatornameRe(e^ix)$ and $sin(x) = operatornameIm(e^ix)$
                            $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y).$$






                            share|cite|improve this answer











                            $endgroup$















                              1












                              1








                              1





                              $begingroup$

                              I always had a hard time to memorize that formula.
                              But actually, that's not really needed, because there it is an easy way to reconstruct it from the from the laws of exponentiation applied to complex exponentiation:
                              $$e^i(x + y) = e^ix cdot e^iy.$$



                              Using the complex multiplication rule $operatornameRe(ab) = operatornameRe(a)operatornameRe(b) - operatornameIm(a)operatornameIm(b)$, taking the real part gives



                              $$operatornameRe(e^i(x + y)) = operatornameRe(e^ix)operatornameRe(e^iy) - operatornameIm(e^ix)operatornameIm(e^iy).$$



                              So by $cos(x) = operatornameRe(e^ix)$ and $sin(x) = operatornameIm(e^ix)$
                              $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y).$$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$



                              I always had a hard time to memorize that formula.
                              But actually, that's not really needed, because there it is an easy way to reconstruct it from the from the laws of exponentiation applied to complex exponentiation:
                              $$e^i(x + y) = e^ix cdot e^iy.$$



                              Using the complex multiplication rule $operatornameRe(ab) = operatornameRe(a)operatornameRe(b) - operatornameIm(a)operatornameIm(b)$, taking the real part gives



                              $$operatornameRe(e^i(x + y)) = operatornameRe(e^ix)operatornameRe(e^iy) - operatornameIm(e^ix)operatornameIm(e^iy).$$



                              So by $cos(x) = operatornameRe(e^ix)$ and $sin(x) = operatornameIm(e^ix)$
                              $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y).$$







                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer








                              edited Nov 2 '13 at 11:32

























                              answered May 7 '13 at 12:12









                              azimutazimut

                              16.5k1052101




                              16.5k1052101





















                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  Let $vecu,vecvinmathbbR^2$ unitary vectors such that
                                  $$
                                  vecu=big(cos(x),sin(x)big)quad mbox and quad vecv=big(cos(-y),sin(-y)big)
                                  $$
                                  Here $x$ and $-y$ are the smallest angle formed between the x-axis and the vectors $vecu$ and $vecv$ respectively. Then
                                  beginalign
                                  cosbig( x+ybig) = & cosbig( x-(-y)big)\
                                  = & fracvecubulletvecvcdot \
                                  = & vecubulletvecv\
                                  = & cos(x)cdotcos(-y)+sin(x)cdotsin(-y)\
                                  = & cos(x)cdotcos(y)-sin(x)cdotsin(y)\
                                  endalign






                                  share|cite|improve this answer











                                  $endgroup$

















                                    1












                                    $begingroup$

                                    Let $vecu,vecvinmathbbR^2$ unitary vectors such that
                                    $$
                                    vecu=big(cos(x),sin(x)big)quad mbox and quad vecv=big(cos(-y),sin(-y)big)
                                    $$
                                    Here $x$ and $-y$ are the smallest angle formed between the x-axis and the vectors $vecu$ and $vecv$ respectively. Then
                                    beginalign
                                    cosbig( x+ybig) = & cosbig( x-(-y)big)\
                                    = & fracvecubulletvecvcdot \
                                    = & vecubulletvecv\
                                    = & cos(x)cdotcos(-y)+sin(x)cdotsin(-y)\
                                    = & cos(x)cdotcos(y)-sin(x)cdotsin(y)\
                                    endalign






                                    share|cite|improve this answer











                                    $endgroup$















                                      1












                                      1








                                      1





                                      $begingroup$

                                      Let $vecu,vecvinmathbbR^2$ unitary vectors such that
                                      $$
                                      vecu=big(cos(x),sin(x)big)quad mbox and quad vecv=big(cos(-y),sin(-y)big)
                                      $$
                                      Here $x$ and $-y$ are the smallest angle formed between the x-axis and the vectors $vecu$ and $vecv$ respectively. Then
                                      beginalign
                                      cosbig( x+ybig) = & cosbig( x-(-y)big)\
                                      = & fracvecubulletvecvcdot \
                                      = & vecubulletvecv\
                                      = & cos(x)cdotcos(-y)+sin(x)cdotsin(-y)\
                                      = & cos(x)cdotcos(y)-sin(x)cdotsin(y)\
                                      endalign






                                      share|cite|improve this answer











                                      $endgroup$



                                      Let $vecu,vecvinmathbbR^2$ unitary vectors such that
                                      $$
                                      vecu=big(cos(x),sin(x)big)quad mbox and quad vecv=big(cos(-y),sin(-y)big)
                                      $$
                                      Here $x$ and $-y$ are the smallest angle formed between the x-axis and the vectors $vecu$ and $vecv$ respectively. Then
                                      beginalign
                                      cosbig( x+ybig) = & cosbig( x-(-y)big)\
                                      = & fracvecubulletvecvcdot \
                                      = & vecubulletvecv\
                                      = & cos(x)cdotcos(-y)+sin(x)cdotsin(-y)\
                                      = & cos(x)cdotcos(y)-sin(x)cdotsin(y)\
                                      endalign







                                      share|cite|improve this answer














                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      edited Nov 2 '13 at 15:33

























                                      answered Nov 2 '13 at 11:49









                                      MathOverviewMathOverview

                                      8,95043164




                                      8,95043164





















                                          0












                                          $begingroup$

                                          For variety, here is a different proof. Unfortunately it might be considered circular since it relies on differentiation of trig functions. But maybe you know their derivatives without using this identity, if say $sin$ and $cos$ have been defined by their Taylor series.



                                          Apply $fracd^2dx^2$ to each side (viewing $y$ as some constant), and you see that each side a solution to $fracd^2dx^2f(x)=-f(x)$



                                          Both sides are in agreement at $x=-y$. Also the first derivatives of each side are in agreement at $x=-y$. Therefore they are the same expression.






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$












                                          • $begingroup$
                                            That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Apr 3 '13 at 1:48















                                          0












                                          $begingroup$

                                          For variety, here is a different proof. Unfortunately it might be considered circular since it relies on differentiation of trig functions. But maybe you know their derivatives without using this identity, if say $sin$ and $cos$ have been defined by their Taylor series.



                                          Apply $fracd^2dx^2$ to each side (viewing $y$ as some constant), and you see that each side a solution to $fracd^2dx^2f(x)=-f(x)$



                                          Both sides are in agreement at $x=-y$. Also the first derivatives of each side are in agreement at $x=-y$. Therefore they are the same expression.






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$












                                          • $begingroup$
                                            That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Apr 3 '13 at 1:48













                                          0












                                          0








                                          0





                                          $begingroup$

                                          For variety, here is a different proof. Unfortunately it might be considered circular since it relies on differentiation of trig functions. But maybe you know their derivatives without using this identity, if say $sin$ and $cos$ have been defined by their Taylor series.



                                          Apply $fracd^2dx^2$ to each side (viewing $y$ as some constant), and you see that each side a solution to $fracd^2dx^2f(x)=-f(x)$



                                          Both sides are in agreement at $x=-y$. Also the first derivatives of each side are in agreement at $x=-y$. Therefore they are the same expression.






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$



                                          For variety, here is a different proof. Unfortunately it might be considered circular since it relies on differentiation of trig functions. But maybe you know their derivatives without using this identity, if say $sin$ and $cos$ have been defined by their Taylor series.



                                          Apply $fracd^2dx^2$ to each side (viewing $y$ as some constant), and you see that each side a solution to $fracd^2dx^2f(x)=-f(x)$



                                          Both sides are in agreement at $x=-y$. Also the first derivatives of each side are in agreement at $x=-y$. Therefore they are the same expression.







                                          share|cite|improve this answer












                                          share|cite|improve this answer



                                          share|cite|improve this answer










                                          answered Apr 2 '13 at 21:39









                                          alex.jordanalex.jordan

                                          39.5k560122




                                          39.5k560122











                                          • $begingroup$
                                            That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Apr 3 '13 at 1:48
















                                          • $begingroup$
                                            That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Apr 3 '13 at 1:48















                                          $begingroup$
                                          That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                          $endgroup$
                                          – Umberto P.
                                          Apr 3 '13 at 1:48




                                          $begingroup$
                                          That solution was mentioned in the question.
                                          $endgroup$
                                          – Umberto P.
                                          Apr 3 '13 at 1:48











                                          0












                                          $begingroup$

                                          $$beginarray rcl
                                          cos(x + y) + i sin(x + y)& = & e^i(x + y) \
                                          &=& e^ixe^iy \
                                          &=& (cos(x) + isin(x))(cos(y) + isin(y)) \
                                          &=& (cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)) + i(sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)) \
                                          endarray$$



                                          Equating real and imaginary parts you get



                                          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)$$
                                          $$sin(x + y) = sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)$$






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$












                                          • $begingroup$
                                            Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Mar 13 at 18:59
















                                          0












                                          $begingroup$

                                          $$beginarray rcl
                                          cos(x + y) + i sin(x + y)& = & e^i(x + y) \
                                          &=& e^ixe^iy \
                                          &=& (cos(x) + isin(x))(cos(y) + isin(y)) \
                                          &=& (cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)) + i(sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)) \
                                          endarray$$



                                          Equating real and imaginary parts you get



                                          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)$$
                                          $$sin(x + y) = sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)$$






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$












                                          • $begingroup$
                                            Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Mar 13 at 18:59














                                          0












                                          0








                                          0





                                          $begingroup$

                                          $$beginarray rcl
                                          cos(x + y) + i sin(x + y)& = & e^i(x + y) \
                                          &=& e^ixe^iy \
                                          &=& (cos(x) + isin(x))(cos(y) + isin(y)) \
                                          &=& (cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)) + i(sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)) \
                                          endarray$$



                                          Equating real and imaginary parts you get



                                          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)$$
                                          $$sin(x + y) = sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)$$






                                          share|cite|improve this answer









                                          $endgroup$



                                          $$beginarray rcl
                                          cos(x + y) + i sin(x + y)& = & e^i(x + y) \
                                          &=& e^ixe^iy \
                                          &=& (cos(x) + isin(x))(cos(y) + isin(y)) \
                                          &=& (cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)) + i(sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)) \
                                          endarray$$



                                          Equating real and imaginary parts you get



                                          $$cos(x + y) = cos(x)cos(y) - sin(x)sin(y)$$
                                          $$sin(x + y) = sin(x)cos(y) + sin(y)cos(x)$$







                                          share|cite|improve this answer












                                          share|cite|improve this answer



                                          share|cite|improve this answer










                                          answered Mar 13 at 9:38









                                          DanielVDanielV

                                          18.1k42755




                                          18.1k42755











                                          • $begingroup$
                                            Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Mar 13 at 18:59

















                                          • $begingroup$
                                            Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                            $endgroup$
                                            – Umberto P.
                                            Mar 13 at 18:59
















                                          $begingroup$
                                          Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                          $endgroup$
                                          – Umberto P.
                                          Mar 13 at 18:59





                                          $begingroup$
                                          Thanks for the answer - this question is nearly 6 years old. At the time I was interested in proving the trig angle-sum formulas using nothing but the series definition of sine and cosine. The issue is that the identity $cos x + i sin x = e^ix$ is outside the scope of the question, and the justification of the further identity $e^w+z = e^w e^z$ is requires tools that essentially prove what was being asked in the first place.
                                          $endgroup$
                                          – Umberto P.
                                          Mar 13 at 18:59


















                                          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%2f349435%2fproofs-of-cosxy-cos-x-cos-y-sin-x-sin-y%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

                                          Solar Wings Breeze Design and development Specifications (Breeze) References Navigation menu1368-485X"Hang glider: Breeze (Solar Wings)"e

                                          Kathakali Contents Etymology and nomenclature History Repertoire Songs and musical instruments Traditional plays Styles: Sampradayam Training centers and awards Relationship to other dance forms See also Notes References External links Navigation menueThe Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: A-MSouth Asian Folklore: An EncyclopediaRoutledge International Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women's Issues and KnowledgeKathakali Dance-drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to PlayKathakali Dance-drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to PlayKathakali Dance-drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to Play10.1353/atj.2005.0004The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: A-MEncyclopedia of HinduismKathakali Dance-drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to PlaySonic Liturgy: Ritual and Music in Hindu Tradition"The Mirror of Gesture"Kathakali Dance-drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to Play"Kathakali"Indian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceMedieval Indian Literature: An AnthologyThe Oxford Companion to Indian TheatreSouth Asian Folklore: An Encyclopedia : Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri LankaThe Rise of Performance Studies: Rethinking Richard Schechner's Broad SpectrumIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceModern Asian Theatre and Performance 1900-2000Critical Theory and PerformanceBetween Theater and AnthropologyKathakali603847011Indian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceIndian Theatre: Traditions of PerformanceBetween Theater and AnthropologyBetween Theater and AnthropologyNambeesan Smaraka AwardsArchivedThe Cambridge Guide to TheatreRoutledge International Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women's Issues and KnowledgeThe Garland Encyclopedia of World Music: South Asia : the Indian subcontinentThe Ethos of Noh: Actors and Their Art10.2307/1145740By Means of Performance: Intercultural Studies of Theatre and Ritual10.1017/s204912550000100xReconceiving the Renaissance: A Critical ReaderPerformance TheoryListening to Theatre: The Aural Dimension of Beijing Opera10.2307/1146013Kathakali: The Art of the Non-WorldlyOn KathakaliKathakali, the dance theatreThe Kathakali Complex: Performance & StructureKathakali Dance-Drama: Where Gods and Demons Come to Play10.1093/obo/9780195399318-0071Drama and Ritual of Early Hinduism"In the Shadow of Hollywood Orientalism: Authentic East Indian Dancing"10.1080/08949460490274013Sanskrit Play Production in Ancient IndiaIndian Music: History and StructureBharata, the Nāṭyaśāstra233639306Table of Contents2238067286469807Dance In Indian Painting10.2307/32047833204783Kathakali Dance-Theatre: A Visual Narrative of Sacred Indian MimeIndian Classical Dance: The Renaissance and BeyondKathakali: an indigenous art-form of Keralaeee

                                          Method to test if a number is a perfect power? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Detecting perfect squares faster than by extracting square rooteffective way to get the integer sequence A181392 from oeisA rarely mentioned fact about perfect powersHow many numbers such $n$ are there that $n<100,lfloorsqrtn rfloor mid n$Check perfect squareness by modulo division against multiple basesFor what pair of integers $(a,b)$ is $3^a + 7^b$ a perfect square.Do there exist any positive integers $n$ such that $lfloore^nrfloor$ is a perfect power? What is the probability that one exists?finding perfect power factors of an integerProve that the sequence contains a perfect square for any natural number $m $ in the domain of $f$ .Counting Perfect Powers