Yes. Except where sin x = 0, because then you would be dividing by zero so the quotient is undefined.
cot(x)=1/tan(x)=1/(sin(x)/cos(x))=cos(x)/sin(x) csc(x)=1/sin(x) sec(x)=1/cos(x) Therefore, (csc(x))2/cot(x)=(1/(sin(x))2)/cot(x)=(1/(sin(x))2)/(cos(x)/sin(x))=(1/(sin(x))2)(sin(x)/cos(x))=(1/sin(x))*(1/cos(x))=csc(x)*sec(x)
Until an "equals" sign shows up somewhere in the expression, there's nothing to prove.
cos*cot + sin = cos*cos/sin + sin = cos2/sin + sin = (cos2 + sin2)/sin = 1/sin = cosec
The Answer is 1 coz, 1-Tan squarex = Cot square X. So cot square x divided cot square x is equal to 1
Cotangent = 1/Tangent : Cosecant = 1/Sine Then, cot + 1 = (1/tan) + 1 = (cos/sin) + (sin/sin) = (cos + sin)/ sin. Now, cos² + sin² = 1 so for the statement to be valid the final expression would have to be : (cos² + sin² ) / sin = 1/sin. As this is not the case then, cot + 1 ≠ cosec. In fact, the relationship link is cot² + 1 = cosec²
sin2 + cos2 = 1 So, (1 - 2*cos2)/(sin*cos) = (sin2 + cos2 - 2*cos2)/(sin*cos) = (sin2 - cos2)/(sin*cos) = sin2/(sin*cos) - cos2/(sin*cos) = sin/cos - cos-sin = tan - cot
cot(x)=1/tan(x)=1/(sin(x)/cos(x))=cos(x)/sin(x) csc(x)=1/sin(x) sec(x)=1/cos(x) Therefore, (csc(x))2/cot(x)=(1/(sin(x))2)/cot(x)=(1/(sin(x))2)/(cos(x)/sin(x))=(1/(sin(x))2)(sin(x)/cos(x))=(1/sin(x))*(1/cos(x))=csc(x)*sec(x)
Until an "equals" sign shows up somewhere in the expression, there's nothing to prove.
cot x = (cos x) / (sin x) cos (x - 180) = cos x cos 180 + sin x sin 180 = - cos x sin (x - 180) = sin x cos 180 - cos x sin 180 = - sin x cot (x - 180) = (cos (x - 180)) / (sin (x - 180)) = (- cos x) / (- sin x) = (cos x) / (sin x) = cot x
cosec(q)*cot(q)*cos(q) = 1/sin(q)*cot(q)*cos(q) = cot2(q)
1/ Tan = 1/ (Sin/Cos) = Cos/Sin = Cot (Cotangent)
cos*cot + sin = cos*cos/sin + sin = cos2/sin + sin = (cos2 + sin2)/sin = 1/sin = cosec
The Answer is 1 coz, 1-Tan squarex = Cot square X. So cot square x divided cot square x is equal to 1
Cotangent = 1/Tangent : Cosecant = 1/Sine Then, cot + 1 = (1/tan) + 1 = (cos/sin) + (sin/sin) = (cos + sin)/ sin. Now, cos² + sin² = 1 so for the statement to be valid the final expression would have to be : (cos² + sin² ) / sin = 1/sin. As this is not the case then, cot + 1 ≠ cosec. In fact, the relationship link is cot² + 1 = cosec²
cot[x]= -1 cot[x] = cos[x] / sin[x] cos[x] / sin[x] = -1 cos[x] = -sin[x] |cos[x]| = |sin[x]| at every multiple of Pi/4 + Pi/2. However, the signs disagree at 3Pi/4 + nPi, where n is an integer.
Manipulate normally, noting:cot x = cos x / sin xcos² x + sin² x = 1 → sin²x = 1 - cos² xa² - b² = (a + b)(a - b)1 = 1²ab = baa/(bc) = a/b/c(1 + cot x)² - 2 cot x = 1² + 2 cot x + cot² x - 2 cot x= 1 + cot² x= 1 + (cos x / sin x)²= 1 + cos² x / sin² x= 1 + cos² x / (1 - cos² x)= ((1 - cos² x) + cos² x)/(1 - cos² x)= 1/(1² - cos² x)= 1/((1 + cos x)(1 - cos x))= 1/(1 - cos x)/(1 + cos x)QED.
== cot(x)== 1/tan(x) = cos(x)/sin(x) Now substitute cos(x)/sin(x) into the expression, in place of cot(x) So now: sin(x) cot(x) cos(x) = sin(x) cos(x) (cos(x)/sin(x) ) sin(x) cos(x) cos(x)/sin(x) The two sin(x) cancel, leaving you with cos(x) cos(x) Which is the same as cos2(x) So: sin(x) cot(x) cos(x) = cos2(x) ===