How do I show that cos(z1 + z2) = cos(z1)cos(z2) - sin(z1)sin(z2)

  • Thread starter Thread starter squenshl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
To demonstrate that cos(z1 + z2) = cos(z1)cos(z2) - sin(z1)sin(z2), one can define z1 and z2 as complex numbers and utilize trigonometric identities derived from their exponential forms. The proof hinges on the definitions of sine and cosine in terms of exponential functions, specifically sin(z) = [e^(iz) - e^(-iz)]/(2i) and cos(z) = [e^(iz) + e^(-iz)]/2. While using these definitions allows for a straightforward derivation of the identity, it assumes properties of the exponential function. Alternatively, power series representations can also be employed, though they may require more complex assumptions. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the importance of the foundational definitions used in proving trigonometric identities in the complex plane.
squenshl
Messages
468
Reaction score
4
How do I show that cos(z1 + z2) = cos(z1)cos(z2) - sin(z1)sin(z2)
I let z1 = a + ib & z2 = c + id
So cos(z1 + z2) = cos(a+ib+c+id) = cos(a+ib)cos(c+id) - sin(a+ib)sin(c+id) = cos(z1)cos(z2) - sin(z1)sin(z2). (From the trig identity).
 
Physics news on Phys.org


How one approaches such a proof depends how one has defined sine and cosine. One definition is
sin(z):=[e^(iz)-e^(-iz)]/(2i)
cos(z):=[e^(iz)+e^(-iz)]/2i
from
(e^a)(e^b)=e^(a+b)
your result would easily follow
What you have done is assume you result.
 


(a+ib) and (c+id) are complex numbers, and, in principle, the trigonometric identities are only proved for real numbers... so doing as you said, you're using complex trigonometric identities to prove complex trigonometric identities.

I think the usual ways to define trigonometric functions in complex plane are: using exponential function or using power series representations... in exponential representation, it's very easy to prove the trig. identities, but you'll have to assume some properties of the exponential function... in series representation, most of the theorems are trivially proved for the complex, so you would have to assume less results, but it's a lot harder.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
39
Views
6K