/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8812228
Holy fuck you are retarded. This bait is so fucking weak. Please kill yourself.

>>8812228
1/cos(x) != cos^-1(x) you fucking retard

>>8812228
You've just conflated two different symbols [math] \cos ^{-1} \left ( \theta \right ) := \arccos \left ( \theta \right ) [/math]. While [math] 1/ \cos \left ( \theta \right ) = \left ( \cos \left ( \theta \right ) \right) ^{-1} [/math]

>>8812232
>This bait is so fucking weak.
>Holy fuck
>kill yourself
What a paradox!

>>8812238
You see, my thread really did create a paradox.

>>8812228
amusing but I don't think an innocent thread deserved to die for this

>>8812238
Not contradictory. Everyone prefers their bait spicy so that it is at least believable so that we can mock the brainlets who buy it.

But then again, look at this faggot >>8812234

I guess your bait wasn't that weak, but my standards too high.

>>8812252
Bump.

>>8812228
the left is the solution for [math]\lambda\leq1[/math] and the right for [math] \lambda\geq1[/math]

This is bait, arccos(cos(x)) =/= x

Wolfram it and show me I am wrong.
This isn't a paradox, it is just bad math

>>8812228
it would appear from this thread that there exists a rare fetish whereby people get off on being rightly called idiots. the question is this: why do we lend them a hand?

this is why the -1 notation is retarded

>>8812228
holy shit lmao

inverse and arccos are not equivalent you dip

>>8813860
helps weed out retards early

>>8812228

>>8812228
>Look guys i found an inconsistency xD. Wheres my prize for shit bait

>>8813864
arccos and inverse cos have different domain implications, but that wasn't the problem in this proof. It was that he was confusing inverse cos with cosine to the negative 1 power (which is 1/cos x, usually called secant).

To the OP: The -1 exponent means inverse function when applied to a function name. When you write cos(x), cos is the name of the cosine function, much like f is the name of f(x). Just like f^-1(x) doesn't mean 1/f(x), cos^-1(x) doesn't mean 1/cos(x).