5
$\begingroup$

How are arcsine and cosecant different mathematically if cosecant is $\frac{1}{\sin(x)}$ and arcsine is $\sin^{-1}(x)$ which is $\frac{1}{\sin(x)}$? I have tried to find an answer before but nobody explained it well enough.

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by user21820, user91500, Hans Lundmark, Gibbs, José Carlos Santos Aug 30 '18 at 13:02

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user21820, user91500, Gibbs
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I think the key thing to remember here is that the notation is genuinely confusing (it's very much not just you!). We're very happy to write $\sin^2(x)$ to mean $(\sin(x))^2$ and $\sin^3(x)$ to mean $(\sin(x))^3$, but when we write $\sin^{-1}(x)$, we don't mean $(\sin(x))^{-1}$! $\endgroup$ – Theo Bendit Aug 30 '18 at 2:09
  • $\begingroup$ @TheoBendit: "We're very happy"? No, not at all. I never write "$\sin^2(x)$" to mean "$(\sin(x))^2$". I don't think convention is a sufficient reason for preserving inconsistent notation. After all, it is just as easy to write "$\sin(x)^2$", which is consistent with the standard function notation and arithmetical syntax. $\endgroup$ – user21820 Aug 30 '18 at 3:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user21820 Fair enough. I do see some advantages of writing $\sin^2$; for example, when you wish to refer to the function $\sin \cdot \sin$, without having to specify a variable. I think there's a slight bump in readability when you substitute some long expression into $\sin^2$. Personally, I don't like the notation $\sin^{-1}$; it's not like $\sin$ has an inverse anyway. That's why I use $\arcsin$ instead. $\endgroup$ – Theo Bendit Aug 30 '18 at 3:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TheoBendit: Well yea there are trade-offs if one wants to pick one. I still strongly prefer not having notation that cannot be disambiguated, and so if one wants to keep both notations, one should define/specify it before using. =) $\endgroup$ – user21820 Aug 30 '18 at 4:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Possible duplicate of What's the difference between arccos(x) and sec(x) $\endgroup$ – Hans Lundmark Aug 30 '18 at 6:32
9
$\begingroup$

They are two totally different functions with different domains and ranges and different definitions.

The notation is confusing and it takes a while for students to master the concepts.

Note that the arcsine function or $\sin ^{-1} x$ as it is common to write is the inverse function under composition not under multiplication.

That is $$\sin ( \sin ^{-1} x )=x$$ is true on the domain of $ \sin ^{-1} x$

While for $\csc x$ the story is different because it is the multiplicative inverse of $\sin x$ which is $$ ( \csc x)\times (\sin x) =1$$

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

$\sin^{-1}(x)$ and $\frac{1}{\sin x}$ are not same

$\sin^{-1}(x)$ is equal to some angle $\theta $ such that $\sin \theta =x $

where $-1\le x \le 1$ and Range $\in [-\pi /2,\pi /2]$

Here is the graph of $\sin^{-1}(x)$

while $\frac{1}{\sin x} $ is simply 1 divided by $\sin x $ $\hspace{20pt}$here $x \in R$ and Range $\in (-\infty,\infty)$

Here is the graph of $\frac{1}{\sin x}$

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

$\sin^{-1}(x)$ doesn't mean $\frac{1}{\sin(x)}$. It means the inverse function of the $\sin$ (when restricted to a conventional interval).

If I have some invertible function $f$ on some interval, so that I can write say $y=f(x)$ then we use $f^{-1}$ to represent the inverse function; we can write $x=f^{-1}(y)$. However, this can sometimes cause confusion with the multiplicative inverse, which can also sometimes be written using a $\cdot^{-1}$-power.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_function ... (and note the "not to be confused with" link right under the title)

So $\arcsin$ is the functional inverse of $\sin$ while $\operatorname{cosec}(x)$ is the multiplicative inverse of $\sin(x)$.

The functional inverses of trig functions are discussed here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_trigonometric_functions

Mathematicians are often inconsistent; when they write $\sin^2(x)$ they mean $(\sin(x))^2$ (rather than say functional composition, $\sin(\sin(x))$), and similarly for other powers - even $-2$ (!) ... but not if that power is $-1$. It's a matter of getting used to the convention, and sticking to $1/\sin(x)$ or $(\sin(x))^{-1}$ when you mean to talk about the multiplicative inverse.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @James If you're going to change that in my answer, change it in the question (as well as the other time I used it); I deliberately used that form to be consistent with the question. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Aug 30 '18 at 2:13
  • $\begingroup$ done but if you are not happy with the edit tell me I will undo it $\endgroup$ – Deepesh Meena Aug 30 '18 at 2:15
  • $\begingroup$ I am happy for you to try to improve the answer (that's how the system is supposed to work) but it's better to be consistent about it. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Aug 30 '18 at 2:17
  • $\begingroup$ Ok so what do you want $\endgroup$ – Deepesh Meena Aug 30 '18 at 2:18
  • $\begingroup$ @James unfortunately when you edited the question, you left one of the $\sin$ functions as $sin$ (just as you did in your answer); this is too small an edit for me to be able to fix in the question. You need to take care with edits. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Aug 30 '18 at 2:19
0
$\begingroup$

To avoid any ambiguity between the reciprocal and the inverse, one may write $$f^{-1}$$ for the reciprocal and $$\mathop f^{-1}$$ for the inverse.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.