Intuitive explanation of Euler's formula $e^{it}=cos(t)+isin(t)$ [duplicate]












1












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • How to prove Euler's formula: $e^{ivarphi}=cos(varphi) +isin(varphi)$?

    17 answers




I'm trying to understand
$$e^{it}=cos(t)+isin(t)$$ This comes from the definitions
$$cos(t)=frac12(e^{it}+e^{-it}) quadtext{and}quad sin(t)=frac1{2i}(e^{it}-e^{-it})$$
and those are consistent with the power series definitions of $cos$ and $sin$, which are their Taylor series
$$sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(-1)^k z^{2k}}{(2k)!}} quadtext{and}quad sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(-1)^k z^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}}$$
respectively.




I see all those things. They make sense and are consistent with each other, but I can't believe that $e$ and cosine and sine are so related coincidentally.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by John Doe, Cesareo, clathratus, dantopa, Lord Shark the Unknown Dec 30 '18 at 5:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.


















  • $begingroup$
    See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
    $endgroup$
    – John Doe
    Dec 29 '18 at 19:07












  • $begingroup$
    Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:41






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:52












  • $begingroup$
    There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
    $endgroup$
    – D.R.
    Dec 29 '18 at 21:16


















1












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • How to prove Euler's formula: $e^{ivarphi}=cos(varphi) +isin(varphi)$?

    17 answers




I'm trying to understand
$$e^{it}=cos(t)+isin(t)$$ This comes from the definitions
$$cos(t)=frac12(e^{it}+e^{-it}) quadtext{and}quad sin(t)=frac1{2i}(e^{it}-e^{-it})$$
and those are consistent with the power series definitions of $cos$ and $sin$, which are their Taylor series
$$sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(-1)^k z^{2k}}{(2k)!}} quadtext{and}quad sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(-1)^k z^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}}$$
respectively.




I see all those things. They make sense and are consistent with each other, but I can't believe that $e$ and cosine and sine are so related coincidentally.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by John Doe, Cesareo, clathratus, dantopa, Lord Shark the Unknown Dec 30 '18 at 5:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.


















  • $begingroup$
    See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
    $endgroup$
    – John Doe
    Dec 29 '18 at 19:07












  • $begingroup$
    Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:41






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:52












  • $begingroup$
    There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
    $endgroup$
    – D.R.
    Dec 29 '18 at 21:16
















1












1








1





$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • How to prove Euler's formula: $e^{ivarphi}=cos(varphi) +isin(varphi)$?

    17 answers




I'm trying to understand
$$e^{it}=cos(t)+isin(t)$$ This comes from the definitions
$$cos(t)=frac12(e^{it}+e^{-it}) quadtext{and}quad sin(t)=frac1{2i}(e^{it}-e^{-it})$$
and those are consistent with the power series definitions of $cos$ and $sin$, which are their Taylor series
$$sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(-1)^k z^{2k}}{(2k)!}} quadtext{and}quad sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(-1)^k z^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}}$$
respectively.




I see all those things. They make sense and are consistent with each other, but I can't believe that $e$ and cosine and sine are so related coincidentally.











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





This question already has an answer here:




  • How to prove Euler's formula: $e^{ivarphi}=cos(varphi) +isin(varphi)$?

    17 answers




I'm trying to understand
$$e^{it}=cos(t)+isin(t)$$ This comes from the definitions
$$cos(t)=frac12(e^{it}+e^{-it}) quadtext{and}quad sin(t)=frac1{2i}(e^{it}-e^{-it})$$
and those are consistent with the power series definitions of $cos$ and $sin$, which are their Taylor series
$$sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(-1)^k z^{2k}}{(2k)!}} quadtext{and}quad sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(-1)^k z^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}}$$
respectively.




I see all those things. They make sense and are consistent with each other, but I can't believe that $e$ and cosine and sine are so related coincidentally.






This question already has an answer here:




  • How to prove Euler's formula: $e^{ivarphi}=cos(varphi) +isin(varphi)$?

    17 answers








complex-numbers intuition






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 29 '18 at 21:02









Blue

49.1k870156




49.1k870156










asked Dec 29 '18 at 18:52









John CataldoJohn Cataldo

1,1931316




1,1931316




marked as duplicate by John Doe, Cesareo, clathratus, dantopa, Lord Shark the Unknown Dec 30 '18 at 5:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









marked as duplicate by John Doe, Cesareo, clathratus, dantopa, Lord Shark the Unknown Dec 30 '18 at 5:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • $begingroup$
    See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
    $endgroup$
    – John Doe
    Dec 29 '18 at 19:07












  • $begingroup$
    Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:41






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:52












  • $begingroup$
    There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
    $endgroup$
    – D.R.
    Dec 29 '18 at 21:16




















  • $begingroup$
    See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
    $endgroup$
    – John Doe
    Dec 29 '18 at 19:07












  • $begingroup$
    Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:41






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Dec 29 '18 at 20:52












  • $begingroup$
    There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
    $endgroup$
    – D.R.
    Dec 29 '18 at 21:16


















$begingroup$
See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
$endgroup$
– John Doe
Dec 29 '18 at 19:07






$begingroup$
See this answer by whuber - it may be helpful. math.stackexchange.com/a/3593/399334
$endgroup$
– John Doe
Dec 29 '18 at 19:07














$begingroup$
Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
$endgroup$
– timtfj
Dec 29 '18 at 20:41




$begingroup$
Thinking in polar coordinates helps—multiplying a number by $i$ rotates its position by $90°$, ie $frac{pi}{4}$, $cos$ and $sin$ calculate the co-ordinates, multiplying by a fractional power of $i$ rotates by the equivalent fraction of $frac{pi}{4}$ and so on. Euler's formula expresses the same thing in imaginary powers of $e$.
$endgroup$
– timtfj
Dec 29 '18 at 20:41




1




1




$begingroup$
Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 29 '18 at 20:52






$begingroup$
Related (duplicate?): Simple proof of Euler Identity $exp itheta = costheta+isintheta$. Also, this possible duplicate has this answer, with a nice visual demonstration of the result. There are more instances of this question floating around Math.SE. Try searching for variations of "euler identity proof"; if no existing answers satisfy you, try to convey what it is about them that you find lacking, so that people don't waste time repeating them.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Dec 29 '18 at 20:52














$begingroup$
There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
$endgroup$
– D.R.
Dec 29 '18 at 21:16






$begingroup$
There is an excellent 3 blue 1 brown video related to this. It cleared everything up to me, in an intuitive sense. I would consider it a must watch for anyone who wants an awesome explanation for Euler’s formula. youtube.com/watch?v=mvmuCPvRoWQ
$endgroup$
– D.R.
Dec 29 '18 at 21:16












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

If you're after an intuitive understanding, I think this page at the Better Explained website might help. It's very visual and imagines exponentiation to an imaginary power in terms of growth which happens "sideways". (I was going to attempt an explanation based on polar coordinates and so on, but I think the page I've linked does it better.)






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    3












    $begingroup$

    Another way to make it feel less coincidental? Differential equations. The function $y=e^x$ satisfies $y'=y$, while $y=sin x$ and $y=cos x$ satisfy $y''=-y$. These are fundamental; we could even define the functions based on these equations. Now, the two are obviously different equations - but we don't have to stop there.



    Consider the equation $y''=y$. That has both $e^x$ and $e^{-x}$ as solutions, along with linear combinations such as $sinh x=frac{e^x-e^{-x}}{2}$ and $cosh x=frac{e^x+e^{-x}}{2}$. Now that's looking a lot more like the equation for $sin$ and $cos$ - and we can get even closer. What happens with the equation $y''=ay$ for some constant $a$? Well, if $a>0$, we get $y=e^{sqrt{a}cdot x}$ and $y=e^{-sqrt{a}cdot x}$ as solutions. We can even apply a substitution $t=sqrt{a}cdot x$ to transform one to the other. Similarly, for negative $a$, we get $y=sin(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ and $y=cos(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ as solutions.



    So now, we have a differential equation $y''=ay$, and the form of the solutions changes when the parameter $a$ changes sign. Outside of that change, we have a substitution that can change one case of the equation to another. What happens if we cross the divide, and use the substitution to go from positive to negative $a$? Start with $y''=y$ and it's solutions $y=e^x,y=e^{-x}$. Apply the substitution $y=sqrt{-1}cdot x = ix$. The new equation is $y''=-y$, with transformed solutions $y=e^{-it}, y=e^{it}$ - or, at least, those should be solutions to the new equation. But we already know that $y=cos t$ and $y=sin t$ are solutions; for things to work out, the new solutions have to be linear combinations of the old and vice versa. Work out the details using values and derivatives at zero, and we get the formulas in the question statement.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 3 at 23:08



















    2












    $begingroup$

    The Euler formula $e^{iz}=cos(z)+isin(z)$, $z in mathbb{C}$, can be shown by using the exponential series along with the series you wrote for sin and cos:



    We have $e^{iz}=sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{k}}{k!}} = sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{2k}}{(2k)!}}+sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(iz)^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}} = cos(z)+isin(z)$ using the fact that for convergent $sum{a_k}$ and $sum{b_k}$ we have that $sum{a_k+b_k}$ converges to $sum{a_k}+ sum{b_k}$ and the fact that $i^{2k}=(-1)^k$ as well as $i^{2k+1} = i (-1)^k$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 2




      $begingroup$
      I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
      $endgroup$
      – John Doe
      Dec 29 '18 at 19:27










    • $begingroup$
      From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
      $endgroup$
      – Riquelme
      Dec 29 '18 at 19:31












    • $begingroup$
      Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
      $endgroup$
      – John Doe
      Dec 29 '18 at 19:40


















    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    If you're after an intuitive understanding, I think this page at the Better Explained website might help. It's very visual and imagines exponentiation to an imaginary power in terms of growth which happens "sideways". (I was going to attempt an explanation based on polar coordinates and so on, but I think the page I've linked does it better.)






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      3












      $begingroup$

      If you're after an intuitive understanding, I think this page at the Better Explained website might help. It's very visual and imagines exponentiation to an imaginary power in terms of growth which happens "sideways". (I was going to attempt an explanation based on polar coordinates and so on, but I think the page I've linked does it better.)






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        3












        3








        3





        $begingroup$

        If you're after an intuitive understanding, I think this page at the Better Explained website might help. It's very visual and imagines exponentiation to an imaginary power in terms of growth which happens "sideways". (I was going to attempt an explanation based on polar coordinates and so on, but I think the page I've linked does it better.)






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        If you're after an intuitive understanding, I think this page at the Better Explained website might help. It's very visual and imagines exponentiation to an imaginary power in terms of growth which happens "sideways". (I was going to attempt an explanation based on polar coordinates and so on, but I think the page I've linked does it better.)







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 29 '18 at 20:53









        timtfjtimtfj

        2,478420




        2,478420























            3












            $begingroup$

            Another way to make it feel less coincidental? Differential equations. The function $y=e^x$ satisfies $y'=y$, while $y=sin x$ and $y=cos x$ satisfy $y''=-y$. These are fundamental; we could even define the functions based on these equations. Now, the two are obviously different equations - but we don't have to stop there.



            Consider the equation $y''=y$. That has both $e^x$ and $e^{-x}$ as solutions, along with linear combinations such as $sinh x=frac{e^x-e^{-x}}{2}$ and $cosh x=frac{e^x+e^{-x}}{2}$. Now that's looking a lot more like the equation for $sin$ and $cos$ - and we can get even closer. What happens with the equation $y''=ay$ for some constant $a$? Well, if $a>0$, we get $y=e^{sqrt{a}cdot x}$ and $y=e^{-sqrt{a}cdot x}$ as solutions. We can even apply a substitution $t=sqrt{a}cdot x$ to transform one to the other. Similarly, for negative $a$, we get $y=sin(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ and $y=cos(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ as solutions.



            So now, we have a differential equation $y''=ay$, and the form of the solutions changes when the parameter $a$ changes sign. Outside of that change, we have a substitution that can change one case of the equation to another. What happens if we cross the divide, and use the substitution to go from positive to negative $a$? Start with $y''=y$ and it's solutions $y=e^x,y=e^{-x}$. Apply the substitution $y=sqrt{-1}cdot x = ix$. The new equation is $y''=-y$, with transformed solutions $y=e^{-it}, y=e^{it}$ - or, at least, those should be solutions to the new equation. But we already know that $y=cos t$ and $y=sin t$ are solutions; for things to work out, the new solutions have to be linear combinations of the old and vice versa. Work out the details using values and derivatives at zero, and we get the formulas in the question statement.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
              $endgroup$
              – timtfj
              Jan 3 at 23:08
















            3












            $begingroup$

            Another way to make it feel less coincidental? Differential equations. The function $y=e^x$ satisfies $y'=y$, while $y=sin x$ and $y=cos x$ satisfy $y''=-y$. These are fundamental; we could even define the functions based on these equations. Now, the two are obviously different equations - but we don't have to stop there.



            Consider the equation $y''=y$. That has both $e^x$ and $e^{-x}$ as solutions, along with linear combinations such as $sinh x=frac{e^x-e^{-x}}{2}$ and $cosh x=frac{e^x+e^{-x}}{2}$. Now that's looking a lot more like the equation for $sin$ and $cos$ - and we can get even closer. What happens with the equation $y''=ay$ for some constant $a$? Well, if $a>0$, we get $y=e^{sqrt{a}cdot x}$ and $y=e^{-sqrt{a}cdot x}$ as solutions. We can even apply a substitution $t=sqrt{a}cdot x$ to transform one to the other. Similarly, for negative $a$, we get $y=sin(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ and $y=cos(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ as solutions.



            So now, we have a differential equation $y''=ay$, and the form of the solutions changes when the parameter $a$ changes sign. Outside of that change, we have a substitution that can change one case of the equation to another. What happens if we cross the divide, and use the substitution to go from positive to negative $a$? Start with $y''=y$ and it's solutions $y=e^x,y=e^{-x}$. Apply the substitution $y=sqrt{-1}cdot x = ix$. The new equation is $y''=-y$, with transformed solutions $y=e^{-it}, y=e^{it}$ - or, at least, those should be solutions to the new equation. But we already know that $y=cos t$ and $y=sin t$ are solutions; for things to work out, the new solutions have to be linear combinations of the old and vice versa. Work out the details using values and derivatives at zero, and we get the formulas in the question statement.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
              $endgroup$
              – timtfj
              Jan 3 at 23:08














            3












            3








            3





            $begingroup$

            Another way to make it feel less coincidental? Differential equations. The function $y=e^x$ satisfies $y'=y$, while $y=sin x$ and $y=cos x$ satisfy $y''=-y$. These are fundamental; we could even define the functions based on these equations. Now, the two are obviously different equations - but we don't have to stop there.



            Consider the equation $y''=y$. That has both $e^x$ and $e^{-x}$ as solutions, along with linear combinations such as $sinh x=frac{e^x-e^{-x}}{2}$ and $cosh x=frac{e^x+e^{-x}}{2}$. Now that's looking a lot more like the equation for $sin$ and $cos$ - and we can get even closer. What happens with the equation $y''=ay$ for some constant $a$? Well, if $a>0$, we get $y=e^{sqrt{a}cdot x}$ and $y=e^{-sqrt{a}cdot x}$ as solutions. We can even apply a substitution $t=sqrt{a}cdot x$ to transform one to the other. Similarly, for negative $a$, we get $y=sin(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ and $y=cos(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ as solutions.



            So now, we have a differential equation $y''=ay$, and the form of the solutions changes when the parameter $a$ changes sign. Outside of that change, we have a substitution that can change one case of the equation to another. What happens if we cross the divide, and use the substitution to go from positive to negative $a$? Start with $y''=y$ and it's solutions $y=e^x,y=e^{-x}$. Apply the substitution $y=sqrt{-1}cdot x = ix$. The new equation is $y''=-y$, with transformed solutions $y=e^{-it}, y=e^{it}$ - or, at least, those should be solutions to the new equation. But we already know that $y=cos t$ and $y=sin t$ are solutions; for things to work out, the new solutions have to be linear combinations of the old and vice versa. Work out the details using values and derivatives at zero, and we get the formulas in the question statement.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Another way to make it feel less coincidental? Differential equations. The function $y=e^x$ satisfies $y'=y$, while $y=sin x$ and $y=cos x$ satisfy $y''=-y$. These are fundamental; we could even define the functions based on these equations. Now, the two are obviously different equations - but we don't have to stop there.



            Consider the equation $y''=y$. That has both $e^x$ and $e^{-x}$ as solutions, along with linear combinations such as $sinh x=frac{e^x-e^{-x}}{2}$ and $cosh x=frac{e^x+e^{-x}}{2}$. Now that's looking a lot more like the equation for $sin$ and $cos$ - and we can get even closer. What happens with the equation $y''=ay$ for some constant $a$? Well, if $a>0$, we get $y=e^{sqrt{a}cdot x}$ and $y=e^{-sqrt{a}cdot x}$ as solutions. We can even apply a substitution $t=sqrt{a}cdot x$ to transform one to the other. Similarly, for negative $a$, we get $y=sin(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ and $y=cos(sqrt{-a}cdot x)$ as solutions.



            So now, we have a differential equation $y''=ay$, and the form of the solutions changes when the parameter $a$ changes sign. Outside of that change, we have a substitution that can change one case of the equation to another. What happens if we cross the divide, and use the substitution to go from positive to negative $a$? Start with $y''=y$ and it's solutions $y=e^x,y=e^{-x}$. Apply the substitution $y=sqrt{-1}cdot x = ix$. The new equation is $y''=-y$, with transformed solutions $y=e^{-it}, y=e^{it}$ - or, at least, those should be solutions to the new equation. But we already know that $y=cos t$ and $y=sin t$ are solutions; for things to work out, the new solutions have to be linear combinations of the old and vice versa. Work out the details using values and derivatives at zero, and we get the formulas in the question statement.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Dec 29 '18 at 21:39









            jmerryjmerry

            15.3k1632




            15.3k1632












            • $begingroup$
              Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
              $endgroup$
              – timtfj
              Jan 3 at 23:08


















            • $begingroup$
              Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
              $endgroup$
              – timtfj
              Jan 3 at 23:08
















            $begingroup$
            Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
            $endgroup$
            – timtfj
            Jan 3 at 23:08




            $begingroup$
            Damped vibrations seem relevant here (eg a meter needle settling). Mixture of exponential decay and sinusoidal oscillation.
            $endgroup$
            – timtfj
            Jan 3 at 23:08











            2












            $begingroup$

            The Euler formula $e^{iz}=cos(z)+isin(z)$, $z in mathbb{C}$, can be shown by using the exponential series along with the series you wrote for sin and cos:



            We have $e^{iz}=sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{k}}{k!}} = sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{2k}}{(2k)!}}+sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(iz)^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}} = cos(z)+isin(z)$ using the fact that for convergent $sum{a_k}$ and $sum{b_k}$ we have that $sum{a_k+b_k}$ converges to $sum{a_k}+ sum{b_k}$ and the fact that $i^{2k}=(-1)^k$ as well as $i^{2k+1} = i (-1)^k$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:27










            • $begingroup$
              From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
              $endgroup$
              – Riquelme
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:31












            • $begingroup$
              Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:40
















            2












            $begingroup$

            The Euler formula $e^{iz}=cos(z)+isin(z)$, $z in mathbb{C}$, can be shown by using the exponential series along with the series you wrote for sin and cos:



            We have $e^{iz}=sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{k}}{k!}} = sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{2k}}{(2k)!}}+sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(iz)^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}} = cos(z)+isin(z)$ using the fact that for convergent $sum{a_k}$ and $sum{b_k}$ we have that $sum{a_k+b_k}$ converges to $sum{a_k}+ sum{b_k}$ and the fact that $i^{2k}=(-1)^k$ as well as $i^{2k+1} = i (-1)^k$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:27










            • $begingroup$
              From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
              $endgroup$
              – Riquelme
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:31












            • $begingroup$
              Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:40














            2












            2








            2





            $begingroup$

            The Euler formula $e^{iz}=cos(z)+isin(z)$, $z in mathbb{C}$, can be shown by using the exponential series along with the series you wrote for sin and cos:



            We have $e^{iz}=sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{k}}{k!}} = sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{2k}}{(2k)!}}+sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(iz)^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}} = cos(z)+isin(z)$ using the fact that for convergent $sum{a_k}$ and $sum{b_k}$ we have that $sum{a_k+b_k}$ converges to $sum{a_k}+ sum{b_k}$ and the fact that $i^{2k}=(-1)^k$ as well as $i^{2k+1} = i (-1)^k$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            The Euler formula $e^{iz}=cos(z)+isin(z)$, $z in mathbb{C}$, can be shown by using the exponential series along with the series you wrote for sin and cos:



            We have $e^{iz}=sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{k}}{k!}} = sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac{(iz)^{2k}}{(2k)!}}+sum_{k=0}^{infty}{frac {(iz)^{2k+1}} {(2k+1)!}} = cos(z)+isin(z)$ using the fact that for convergent $sum{a_k}$ and $sum{b_k}$ we have that $sum{a_k+b_k}$ converges to $sum{a_k}+ sum{b_k}$ and the fact that $i^{2k}=(-1)^k$ as well as $i^{2k+1} = i (-1)^k$.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Dec 29 '18 at 19:20

























            answered Dec 29 '18 at 19:15









            RiquelmeRiquelme

            93116




            93116








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:27










            • $begingroup$
              From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
              $endgroup$
              – Riquelme
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:31












            • $begingroup$
              Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:40














            • 2




              $begingroup$
              I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:27










            • $begingroup$
              From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
              $endgroup$
              – Riquelme
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:31












            • $begingroup$
              Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
              $endgroup$
              – John Doe
              Dec 29 '18 at 19:40








            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
            $endgroup$
            – John Doe
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:27




            $begingroup$
            I don't see how this answers the question. OP says they are aware of the power series proof, and all the maths makes sense logically. The question was about how to gain intuition about the result.
            $endgroup$
            – John Doe
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:27












            $begingroup$
            From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
            $endgroup$
            – Riquelme
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:31






            $begingroup$
            From my understanding he only was aware of the power series definition of sin and cos as well as that $sin(t)=frac{e^{it}-e^{-it}}{2i}$ and $cos(t)=frac{e^{it}+e^{-it}}{2}$ hold.
            $endgroup$
            – Riquelme
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:31














            $begingroup$
            Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
            $endgroup$
            – John Doe
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:40




            $begingroup$
            Hmm... I feel like the wording that the equations are "consistent" with the power series for $sin$ and $cos$ means he is also aware of the power series for $e^t$. In any case, the final sentence and the question tag suggest maybe OP wanted a different angle.
            $endgroup$
            – John Doe
            Dec 29 '18 at 19:40



            Popular posts from this blog

            Wiesbaden

            Marschland

            Dieringhausen