397. Two similar trigonometrical identities.
by Virgil Nicula, Aug 9, 2014, 1:42 PM
PP. Prove the following identities in a triangle
(standard notations):
, where
is the area of
.
.
Proof. I"ll use the evident identities
and
.

. Remark.

. Observe that 
.

, i.e. the identity
. Otherwise.




.
PP1. Prove that the linear-angled inequality
in
(standard notations).
Proof.

.
PP2. Prove that
.
Proof.
.

.
![$2\left[\left(\cos \frac {3\pi}7+\cos \frac {\pi}7\right)-\left(1+\cos \frac {2\pi}7\right)\right]\ \stackrel{(*)}{=}$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/4/0/5/4054dc870d9bc45798d2b223966a295a437c75c9.png)
. The equation is
, i.e.
.
Remark.
.
PP3. Sa se demonstreze prin inductie relatia
Proof 1 (inductie).
Etapa 1. Pentru
egalitatea devine
adevarat.
Etapa 2. Presupunem egalitatea adevarata pentru
numere si o vom demonstra pentru
numere. Vom arata ca 


Daca
atunci e evident. Altfel putem imparti prin 
Proof 2 (direct). Ne propunem sa gasim formula pentru suma
din care vom obtine 
Metoda I. Se calculeaza direct sau prin inductie suma
si se aplica identitatea
pentru 
Metoda II. Se calculeaza direct sau prin inductie suma
si prin derivare se obtine 
Metoda III (numere complexe). Notam
Atunci
pentru orice
Notam suma
si suma
Asadar
care se calculeaza prin unul din procedeele mentionate mai sus dupa care se identifica partile reale/imaginare.
Comentariu. Formulata astfel, problema initiala nu este interesanta deoarece ni se da rezultatul si nu apare "ipoteza inductiei" ca un act creator, devenind doar un exercitiu de rutina, plicticos. Ceea ce ma surprinde in mod neplacut este faptul ca numeroase exercitii care apar la capitolul "Inductia matematica" sunt de aceasta forma sau eventual se cere "cat face suma ... " ca apoi sa se solicite "verificarea prin inductie", ceea ce este la fel de "nociv" pentru a intelege profund aceasta metoda fecunda a inductiei matematice. Dupa parerea mea ar fi trebuit sa se solicite calcularea sumei respective, ramanand la alegerea elevului procedeul, eventual si metoda inductiei complete. Prin acest "discurs" nu ma adresez "problemistilor", ci indeosebi profesorilor de matematica (in actul predarii).





Proof. I"ll use the evident identities







































PP1. Prove that the linear-angled inequality


Proof.





![$\sum \left[\frac {bc}2+\frac {b\left(a^2-b^2\right)}{2c}+\frac {bc}{2}+\frac {c\left(a^2-c^2\right)}{2b}\right]=$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/6/9/c/69cc8b6418406c6b590cff80cb47438c99574064.png)
![$\sum\left[bc-\frac {(b+c)(b-c)^2}{2a}\right]\le \sum bc\implies$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/8/b/9/8b933248003cedd8c2bd0b0eb28bc29df285a56d.png)

PP2. Prove that

Proof.






![$4\left[\cos\frac {2\pi}7-\left(\cos\frac {3\pi}7+\cos\frac {\pi}7\right)\right]\ \stackrel{(*)}{=}$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/5/e/b5e5241a1f41f96dd3a056f130744d405a8399a0.png)
![$4\left[\cos\frac {2\pi}7-\left(\frac 12-\cos \frac {5\pi}7\right)\right]=4\left(\cos\frac {2\pi}7+\cos \frac {5\pi}7\right)-2=-2\implies \boxed{\ s_2=-2\ }$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/a/c/bacacc139fd6944333c85f547db5ffd184b51ea2.png)



![$2\left[\left(\cos \frac {3\pi}7+\cos \frac {\pi}7\right)-\left(1+\cos \frac {2\pi}7\right)\right]\ \stackrel{(*)}{=}$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/4/0/5/4054dc870d9bc45798d2b223966a295a437c75c9.png)
![$2\left[\left(\frac 12-\cos \frac {5\pi}7\right)-\left(1+\cos \frac {2\pi}7\right)\right]=$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/5/e/d5e22f790c147056f4ae0923a0eb228cc4f3c209.png)
![$2\left[-\frac 12-\left(\cos \frac {5\pi}7+\cos \frac {2\pi}7\right)\right]=-1\implies \boxed{\ s_3=-1\ }$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/f/f/dff076acb7c55b453111451fe0040b6dc1cc94db.png)


Remark.



PP3. Sa se demonstreze prin inductie relatia

Proof 1 (inductie).
Etapa 1. Pentru



Etapa 2. Presupunem egalitatea adevarata pentru





![$\underline{\underline{\underline{n\sin(n+1)x}}}+(n+1)[\sin(n+1)x]\cdot 4\sin^2\frac x2=\underline{\underline{\underline{(n+2)\sin(n+1)x}}}-\underline{\underline{(n+1)\sin(n+2)x}}$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/a/f/9/af9581077f93242c097e0fca04558c729c2cca5f.png)

![$\underline{\underline{(n+1)}}[\sin nx+sin(nx+2x)]+\underline{\underline{(n+1)}}[\sin(n+1)x]\cdot4sin^2\frac x2=2\underline{\underline{(n+1)}}\sin(n+1)x$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/c/0/3/c033ecef2cb01f4c45fedc28141b785fbc981b68.png)

Daca


Proof 2 (direct). Ne propunem sa gasim formula pentru suma


Metoda I. Se calculeaza direct sau prin inductie suma



Metoda II. Se calculeaza direct sau prin inductie suma


Metoda III (numere complexe). Notam






Comentariu. Formulata astfel, problema initiala nu este interesanta deoarece ni se da rezultatul si nu apare "ipoteza inductiei" ca un act creator, devenind doar un exercitiu de rutina, plicticos. Ceea ce ma surprinde in mod neplacut este faptul ca numeroase exercitii care apar la capitolul "Inductia matematica" sunt de aceasta forma sau eventual se cere "cat face suma ... " ca apoi sa se solicite "verificarea prin inductie", ceea ce este la fel de "nociv" pentru a intelege profund aceasta metoda fecunda a inductiei matematice. Dupa parerea mea ar fi trebuit sa se solicite calcularea sumei respective, ramanand la alegerea elevului procedeul, eventual si metoda inductiei complete. Prin acest "discurs" nu ma adresez "problemistilor", ci indeosebi profesorilor de matematica (in actul predarii).
This post has been edited 29 times. Last edited by Virgil Nicula, May 30, 2016, 4:56 PM