Intuitive Understanding of Sine Waves

by
Like it? Try the ebook

Sine waves confused me. Yes, I can mumble "SOH CAH TOA" and draw lines within triangles. But what does it mean?

I was stuck thinking sine had to be extracted from other shapes. A quick analogy:

You: Geometry is about shapes, lines, and so on...

Alien: Oh? Can you show me a line?

You (looking around): Uh... see that brick, there? A line is one edge of that brick.

Alien: So lines are part of a shape?

You: Sort of. Yes, most shapes have lines in them. But a line is a basic concept on its own: a beam of light, a direct route on a map, or even a vector in many dimensions. You see--

Alien: Lines come from bricks. Bricks bricks bricks.

The frustration! Because sine is introduced with angles and circles, my brain thinks "Sine comes from circles. Circles circles circles."

No more. In a sentence:

Sine a natural sway, the epitome of smoothness: it makes circles "circular" in the same way lines make squares "square".

Let's build our intuition by seeing sine as its own shape, and then understand how it fits into circles and the like. Onward!

Sine vs Lines

Remember to separate an idea from an example: squares are examples of lines. Sine clicked when it became its own idea, not "part of a circle."

Let's observe sine in a simulator (Email readers, you may need to open the article directly):

Hubert will give the tour:

  • Click start. Go, Hubert go! Notice that smooth back and forth motion? That's Hubert, but more importantly (sorry Hubert), that's sine! It's natural, the way springs bounce, pendulums swing, strings vibrate... and many things move.
  • Change "vertical" to "linear". Big difference -- see how the motion gets constant and robotic, like a game of pong?

Let's explore the differences with video:

  • Linear motion is constant: we go a set speed and turn around instantly. It's the unnatural motion in the robot dance (notice the linear bounce with no slowdown at 0:07, the strobing effect at :38).
  • Sine changes its speed: it starts fast, slows down, stops, and speeds up again. It's the enchanting smoothness in liquid dancing (human sine wave at 0:12 and 0:23, natural bounce at :47).

Unfortunately, textbooks don't show sine with animations or dancing. No, they prefer to introduce sine with a timeline (try setting "horizontal" to "timeline"):

(source)

Egads. This is the schematic diagram we've always been shown. Does it give you the feeling of sine? Not any more than a skeleton portrays the agility of a cat. Let's watch sine move and then chart its course.

The Unavoidable Circle

Circles have sine. Yes. But seeing the sine inside a circle is like getting the eggs back out of the omelette. It's all mixed together!

Let's take it slow. In the simulation, set Hubert to vertical:none and horizontal: sine*. See him wiggle sideways? That's the motion of sine. There's a small tweak: normally sine starts the cycle at the neutral midpoint and races to the max. This time, we start at the max and fall towards the midpoint. Sine that "starts at the max" is called cosine, and it's just a version of sine (like a horizontal line is a version of a vertical line).

Ok. Time for both sine waves: put vertical as "sine" and horizontal as "sine*". And... we have a circle!

A horizontal and vertical "spring" combine to give circular motion. Most textbooks draw the circle and try to extract the sine, but I prefer to build up: start with pure horizontal or vertical motion and add in the other.

Quick Q & A

A few insights I missed when first learning sine:

Sine really is 1-dimensional

Sine wiggles in one dimension. Really. We often graph sine over time (so we don't write over ourselves) and sometimes the "thing" doing sine is also moving, but this is optional! A spring in one dimension is a perfectly happy sine wave.

Circles are an example of two sine waves

Circles and square are a combination of basic components (sines and lines). But circles aren't the "origin" of sines any more than squares are the root cause of lines.

What do the values of sine mean?

Sine cycles between -1 and 1. It starts at 0, grows to 1.0 (max), dives to -1.0 (min) and returns to neutral. I also see sine like a percentage, from 100% (full steam ahead) to -100% (full retreat).

What's is the input 'x' in sin(x)?

Tricky question. Sine is a cycle and x, the input, is how far along we are in the cycle.

Let's look at lines:

  • You're traveling on a square. Each side takes 10 seconds.
  • After 1 second, you are 10% complete on that side
  • After 5 seconds, you are 50% complete
  • After 10 seconds, you finished the side

Linear motion has few surprises. Now for sine (focusing on the "0 to max" cycle):

  • We're traveling on a sine wave, from 0 (neutral) to 1.0 (max). This portion takes 10 seconds.
  • After 5 seconds we are... 70% complete! Sine rockets out of the gate and slows down. Most of the gains are in the first 5 seconds
  • It takes 5 more seconds to get from 70% to 100%. And going from 98% to 100% takes almost a full second!

Despite our initial speed, sine slows so we gently kiss the max value before turning around. This smoothness makes sine, sine.

For the geeks: Press "show stats" in the simulation. You'll see the percent complete of the total cycle, mini-cycle (0 to 1.0), and the value attained so far. Stop, step through, and switch between linear and sine motion to see the values.

Quick quiz: What's higher, 10% of a linear cycle, or 10% of a sine cycle? Sine. Remember, it barrels out of the gate at max speed. The average speed is indeed hit at 50% of the cycle time, but in the beginning we're going faster than average.

So x is the 'amount of your cycle'. What's the cycle?

It depends on the context.

  • Basic trig: 'x' is degrees, and a full cycle is 360 degrees
  • Advanced trig: 'x' is radians (they are more natural!), and a full cycle is going around the unit circle (2*pi radians)

Play with values of x here:

But again, cycles depend on circles! Can we escape their tyranny?

Pi without Pictures

Imagine a sightless alien who only notices shades of light and dark. Could you describe pi to him? It's hard to flicker the idea of a circle's circumference, right?

Let's step back a bit. Sine is a repeating pattern, which means it must... repeat! It goes from 0, to 1, to 0, to -1, to 0, and so on.

Let's define pi as the time sine takes from 0 to 1 and back to 0. Whoa! Now we're using pi without a circle too! Pi is a concept that just happens to show up in circles:

  • Sine is a gentle back and forth rocking
  • Pi is the time from neutral to max and back to neutral
  • n*Pi (0*Pi, 1*pi, 2*pi, and so on) are the times you are at neutral
  • 2*Pi, 4*pi, 6*pi, etc. are full cycles

Aha! That is why pi appears in so many formulas! Pi doesn't "belong" to circles any more than 0 and 1 do -- pi is about sine returning to center! A circle is an example of a shape that repeats and returns to center every 2*pi units. But springs, vibrations, etc. return to center after pi too!

Question: If pi is half of a natural cycle, why does it go on forever (i.e., irrational)?

Can I answer a question with a question? Why does the diagonal of a "unit square" have length sqrt(2), which also goes on forever?

But yes, I realize it's philosophically inconvenient when nature behaves randomly. I don't have a good intuition.

How fast is sine?

I've been tricky. Previously, I said "imagine it takes sine 10 seconds from 0 to max". And now it's pi seconds from 0 to max back to 0? What gives?

  • sin(x) is the default, off-the-shelf sine wave, that indeed takes pi units of time from 0 to max to 0 (or 2*pi for a complete cycle)
  • sin(2x) is a wave that moves twice as fast
  • sin(x/2) is a wave that moves twice as slow

So, we use sin(n*x) to get a sine wave cycling as fast as we need. Often, the phrase "sine wave" is referencing the general shape and not a specific speed.

Part 2: Understanding the definitions of sine

That's a brainful -- take a break if you need it. Hopefully, sine is emerging as its own pattern. Now let's develop our intuition by seeing how common definitions of sine connect.

Definition 1: The height of a triangle / circle!

Sine was first found in triangles. You may remember "SOH CAH TOA" as a mnemonic

  • SOH: Sine is Opposite / Hypotenuse
  • CAH: Cosine is Adjacent / Hypotenuse
  • TOA: Tangent is Opposite / Adjacent

For a right triangle with angle x, sin(x) is the length of the opposite side divided by the hypotenuse. If we make the hypotenuse 1, we can simplify to:

  • Sine = Opposite
  • Cosine = Adjacent

And with more cleverness, we can draw our triangles with hypotenuse 1 in a circle with radius 1:

Voila! A circle containing all possible right triangles (since they can be scaled up using similarity). For example:

  • sin(45) = .707
  • Lay down a 10-foot pole and raise it 45 degrees. It is 10 * sin(45) = 7.07 feet off the ground
  • An 8-foot pole would be 8 * sin(45) = 5.65 feet

These direct manipulations are great for construction (the pyramids won't calculate themselves). Unfortunately, after thousands of years we start thinking the meaning of sine is the height of a triangle. No no, it's a shape that shows up in circles (and triangles).

Realistically, for many problems we go into "geometry mode" and start thinking "sine = height" to speed through things. That's fine -- just don't get stuck there.

Definition 2: The infinite series

I've avoided the elephant in the room: how in blazes do we actually calculate sine!? Is my calculator drawing a circle and measuring it?

Glad to rile you up. Here's the circle-less secret of sine:

Sine is acceleration opposite to your current position

Using our bank account metaphor: Imagine a perverse boss who gives you a raise the exact opposite of your current bank account! If you have $50 in the bank, then your raise next week is -$50. Of course, your income might be $75/week, so you'll still be earning some money ($75 - $50 for that week), but eventually your balance will decrease as the "raises" overpower your income.

But never fear! Once your account hits negative (say you're at -$50), then your boss gives a legit $50/week raise. Again, your income might be negative, but eventually the raises will overpower it.

This constant pull towards the center keeps the cycle going: when you rise up, the "pull" conspires to pull you in again. It also explains why neutral is the max speed for sine: If you are at the max, you begin falling and accumulating more and more "negative raises" as you plummet. As you pass through then neutral point you are feeling all the negative raises possible (once you cross, you'll start getting positive raises and slowing down).

By the way: since sine is acceleration opposite to your current position, and a circle is made up of a horizontal and vertical sine... you got it! Circular motion can be described as "a constant pull opposite your current position, towards your horizontal and vertical center".

Geeking Out With Calculus

Let's describe sine with calculus. Like e, we can break sine into smaller effects:

  • Start at 0 and grow at unit speed
  • At every instant, get pulled back by negative acceleration

How should we think about this? See how each effect above changes our distance from center:

  • Our initial kick increases distance linearly: y (distance from center) = x (time taken)
  • At any moment, we feel a restoring force of -x. We integrate twice to turn negative acceleration into distance:

\displaystyle{ \iint -x = -x^3/3! }

Seeing how acceleration impacts distance is like seeing how a raise hits your bank account. The "raise" must change your income, and your income changes your bank account (two integrals "up the chain").

So, after "x" seconds we might guess that sine is "x" (initial impulse) minus x^3/3! (effect of the acceleration):

Something's wrong -- sine doesn't nosedive! With e, we saw that "interest earns interest" and sine is similar. The "restoring force" changes our distance by -x^3/3!, which creates another restoring force to consider. Consider a spring: the pull that yanks you down goes too far, which shoots you downward and creates another pull to bring you up (which again goes too far). Springs are crazy!

We need to consider every restoring force:

  • y = x is our initial motion, which creates a restoring force of impact:
  • y = -x^3/3!, which creates a restoring force of impact:
  • y = x^5/5!, which creates a restoring force of impact:
  • y = -x^7/7! which creates a restoring force of impact...

Just like e, sine can be described with an infinite equation:

\displaystyle{sin(x) = x - x^3/3! + x^5/5! - x^7/7! + ... }

I saw this formula a lot, but it only clicked when I saw sine as a combination of an initial impulse and restoring forces. The initial push (y = x, going positive) is eventually overcome by a restoring force (which pulls us negative), which is overpowered by its own restoring force (which pulls us positive), and so on.

A few fun notes:

  • Consider the "restoring force" like "positive or negative interest". This makes the sine/e connection in Euler's formula easier to understand. Sine is like e, except sometimes it earns negative interest. There's more to learn here :) .
  • For small amounts, "y = x" is a good guess for sine. We just take the initial impulse and ignore any restoring forces.

The Calculus of Cosine

Cosine is just a shifted sine, and is fun (yes!) now that we understand sine:

  • Sine: Start at 0, initial impulse of y = x (100%)
  • Cosine: Start at 1, no initial impulse

So cosine just starts off... sitting there at 1. We let the restoring force do the work:

\displaystyle{y = 1 - x^2/2!}

Again, we integrate -1 twice to get -x^2/2!. But this kicks off another restoring force, and before you know it:

\displaystyle{cos(x) = 1 - x^2/2! + x^4/4!}

Definition 3: The differential equation

We've described sine's behavior with specific equations. A more succinct way (equation):

\displaystyle{y'' = -y}

This beauty says:

  • Our current position is y
  • Our acceleration (2nd derivative, or y'') is the opposite of our current position (-y)

Both sine and cosine make this true. I first hated this definition; it's so divorced from a visualization. I didn't realize it described the essence of sine, "acceleration opposite your position".

And remember how sine and e are connected? Well, e^x can be be described by (equation):

\displaystyle{y'' = y}

The same equation with a positive sign ("acceleration equal to your position")! When sine is "the height of a circle" it's really hard to make the connection to e.

One of my great mathematical regrets is not learning differential equations. But I want to, and I suspect having an intuition for sine and e will be crucial.

Summing it up

The goal is to move sine from some mathematical trivia ("part of a circle") to its own shape:

  • Sine is a smooth, swaying motion between min (-1) and max (1). Mathematically, you're accelerating opposite your position. This "negative interest" keeps sine rocking forever.
  • Sine happens to appear in circles and triangles (and springs, pendulums, vibrations, sound...)
  • Pi is the time from neutral to neutral in sin(x). It doesn't "belong" to circles any more than 0 and 1 do.

Let sine enter your mental toolbox (Hrm, I need a formula to make smooth changes...). Eventually, we'll understand the foundations intuitively (e, pi, radians, imaginaries, sine...) and they can be mixed into a scrumptious math salad. Enjoy!

Share what worked: Aha moments & FAQ

Let's create a living reference for how best to understand this topic.

51 thoughts on “Intuitive Understanding of Sine Waves”

  4. Excellent work! Thank you.

    I particularly enjoyed having the infinite series model click intuitively, and seeing that the unit circle contained all possible right triangles. Why, yes, yes it does!

  5. Brilliant. I must agree with Erich, the infinite series visualization is wonderfully intuitive.

  6. @D-POWER: Awesome ;)

    @Erich/Anonymous: Thanks for letting me know what made it click! I’m working on an idea to make it easier to share these types of aha moments.

  7. Your graph “Better Models of Sine” illustrating the successive series approximations of sine has an error: it indicates that sin(x) = x – x³/3! + x⁵/5! – x⁷/y! + x⁹/9! – x⁹/9! + x¹¹/11! …, which includes x⁹ twice rather than once. With as many terms, it should be sin(x) = x – x³/3! + x⁵/5! – x⁷/y! + x⁹/9! – x¹¹/11! + x¹³/13! …

  12. @Anon1: Thank you!

    @Anon2: Glad it helped — sine has bugged me for so long.

    @Anon3: Love those pictures! Our brains need both :) .

  14. @Anonymous: That’s just the names we’ve given to those ratios, like saying perimeter = 4 * side [in a square].

    But as it turns out, sine isn’t limited to triangles — that is just the first place it was noticed.

  15. I haven’t made the connection between sine as an idea and why the ratios in SOHCAHTOA are what they are. Am I making sense?

  16. Wow, thanks once again Kalid. Your explanatiosn are truly wonderful, just how do you come to such a level of knowledge and how do you manage to explain it so easily?
    I wish you were my teacher.
    Every article is just magic, please keep writing it’s a real relief every time you release another article.

  17. Thank you!

    That was a fantastic lesson. Since I left school I’ve come back to math every few years to try and remember everything I’d forgotten. The best feeling in the world (yep, even better than *that* one…) is the “Eureka!” moment when everything just makes sense. Your article gave me two of those, from watching Hubert move in his circle and from seeing the derivitave definition of sine and how it related to e. You have a gift for teaching and writing, thank you for sharing it.

  18. @Anonymous: I put an answer at http://www.reddit.com/r/learnmath/comments/guyik/why_do_the_ratios_in_sohcahtoa_work/, let me know if it helps!

    @nschoe: Thanks for dropping by! I appreciate the kind words — I don’t think I really understand that much, it’s more my lack of understanding/satisfaction which drives me to seek simpler explanations. The notion that sine is this cyclical wave that we all see just didn’t click deeply with me, I needed something deeper. Many ideas are like that (e, imaginaries, etc.) so I start trying to find analogies that might fit better :) .

    I’ll definitely keep writing, appreciate the support!

    @loimprevisto: You’re welcome! You got it, those Eureka moments are so incredibly fulfilling. It’s what I strive for when writing, I just want to share what clicked hoping it clicks for other people too. Thanks for sharing what aspects helped (Hubert / derivative definition), I have a project in the works to make these insight exchanges easier & more community driven :) .

  19. Since my engineering studies I always liked Euler’s formula, connecting sine and cosine to the unit circle in the complex number plane. That’s what Hubert’s sine-sine setting reminded me of.

  20. @Anon: Thanks for sharing — yes, Euler’s formula definitely makes it all click.

  21. I’ve been reading these for a while, I have to say I think this is the best one yet. We did Taylor series a month or so ago in my Calc class, the end of this article aided my comprehension a whole lot more than any of the class work ever did. Keep ‘em coming, please!

  22. @Joe: Thanks — this was one of the longer ones to write so glad it was helpful… I’ll keep cranking :)

  23. You are a master. At some point I would love to hear your take on why the pattern that emerges in transformation matrices
    cos -sin
    sin cos
    changes for rotations about the y axis. For now I”m feeling hungry for a salad….

  25. @mark: Thanks — transformations matrices would be a fun addition.

    @iheartcomputers: Exactly! I was the same way, I thought I understood them too :) .

  27. @Dan: Thanks for the pointer! I love seeing more examples in the real world.

  28. Hi Kalid, great article and great site! But I haven’t understand a thing: the opposite acceleration of x is the double integral of (-x). So we get that, just a moment after the beginning, sin(x) = x – x^3/3!. That’s fine.
    Now we have another opposite acceleration so we have to integrate twice -(x – x^3/3!), don’t we? we then get an acceleration of -x^3/3! + x^5/5!. Summing this to the previous result of sin(x) we get sin(x) = x – 2*x^3/3! + x^5/5!. But this is obviously wrong, as the series has -1*x^3/3! instead of -2*x^3/3!.
    It seems like we don’t have to integrate -(x – x^3/3!) but only x^3/3!; Why? if the acceleration must be the opposite of the current value, I expect to integrate all of its members.
    Thank you very much

  29. @simone: Great question! You might take a look at the diagrams here:

    http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/

    Basically, each motion (-x) creates interest (-x^3/3!), which creates s interest (+x^5/5!), which creates interest…

    My intuitive understanding is that the initial motion (-x) begins a chain reaction, but the chain goes forward — it doesn’t pull back and change the original. I.e., the interest doesn’t go back and change the original… it just generates its own interest (this might be more clear in the diagrams on that article… Mr. Blue creates Mr. Green who creates Mr. Red… Mr. Blue doesn’t even know about Mr. Red!).

  30. I struggled to teach sine to my friend, but now I realize that I didn’t understand it myself. Not intuitively anyway. Can’t wait for your next post!

  31. @C: Thanks! Yep, often times I don’t get an intuition until visiting the topic a 2nd (or 3rd) time :) .

  32. Kalid, you are god of mathematical explanation.I have been visiting this site and I will always visit it.So many things I was taught in college is just making sense now. Thank you!

  33. Your website is brilliant. I am 37 and have always struggled with mathematics. Reading your site makes me feel like I suffered a form of child abuse the way I was taught at school.

    I left high school with the impression that sine “came from” triangles. University classes left me none the wiser. It was only when I bought and read books which were written fairly well that I understood sine to come from circles. It was an epiphany. I was in my mid 20s.

    Now you give me another epiphany, that circles come from sine. Brilliant, but 20 years late! I wish you had been around all those years ago.

    Keep it up.

  36. I noticed your Sine wave simulator is gone….can you find another one we can link to?

  37. “pi is about sine returning to center! A circle is an example of a shape that repeats and returns to center every 2*pi units. But springs, vibrations, etc. return to center after pi too!”

    Even Feynman never figured this out:

    “About a half year later, I found another book which gave the inductance of round coils and square coils, and there were other pi’s in those formulas. I began to think about it again, and I realized that the pi did not come from the circular coils. I understand it better now; but in my heart I still don’t know where that circle is, where that pi comes from.”

    http://www.fotuva.org/feynman/what_is_science.html

  38. @Matthew: Hrm, I think the website I linked to may have been down for a bit — it should be back in the article now. Thanks for the note though!

    @Peter: Wow, thanks for the reference! The “pi must be about circles” mantra has been pounded into all of us for a long time :) .

  39. @Theo: Wow, thanks for the kind words! I’m basically doing the same as you — going back to relearn what I thought I learned in college :) .

    @Michael: Thanks for the kind words and encouragement! There are so many misconceptions that I’m only beginning to unravel (this whole sine business only started clearing up in the last few months). I love that epiphany feeling. Sorry for the delay in reply, I was on vacation when these earlier comments were posted.

    @Jay: You’ll never look at sine the same again :) .

    @Zack: Don’t know Chinese unfortunately… Google translate?

  42. yeah. thx for great articles. I hope I can learn more about math, because i will study informatics after summer.

  44. You are awesome!!! Seeing sine as motion and not part of a static geometric diagram is so new! I’ve been really curious about how to understand math in different ways. I see at uni that the concepts learned in school are gussied up in different disguises, based on the discipline.

    I just had a question to clarify what you said about pi as being a notion of time. I didn’t quite understand, given that I’ve always thought of pi as distance. But this is sort of a two-sides of a coin thing…do you mean that distance=rate x time, and just assume that the unit for the rate of sine to go from neutral to neutral is pi/seconds? So that the units cancel out and thus distance is equal to time?

    Also, could you just briefly clarify how you got the successive terms in “The Better Models of Sine” section? x is the initial impulse, and I think I follow your double integration of the opposite position, but then where do you get x5/5! and so forth?

  45. @Ashley: Thanks for the note! Yep, a key to math is trying to see it from different angles — some click better than others.

    1) Yep, pi is like time if you assume rate = “1 unit per second” (or really, 1 unit per unit time). So then you have distance = rate * time, or distance = time.

    If we’re talking about radians (distance traveled along the outside of the circle) then if we go for 2*pi units of time, we’ve traveled a distance of 2*pi and we’re all the way around. If you see sine as a “living, moving” process, the 2*pi is how often the process is back to its initial position. pi by itself is the time from neutral to neutral (middle-top-middle or middle-bottom-middle).

    2) Great question. With e, we’ve seen that our “interest earns interest”. In the same way, the “restoring force” of sine creates its own restoring force, which creates another restoring force… and so on.

    The thing is, these happen _simultaneously_, we don’t need to wait for the first force to happen (or maybe another way, it happens infinitely quickly so we can’t tell). So when we compute sine, we have to account for as many restoring forces as possible to be accurate.

    So, our original force is x (call this A). This creates a restoring force B (pulling us to center) of x^3/3! (the double integral of x). That creates force C which tries to balance the pull center with a push away (double integral of x^3/3! is x^5/5!).

    In this way, A creates B, which creates C, which creates D… to infinity :) . Actually, each restoring force is in the opposite direction (x has restoring force -x^3/3! because the rule for sine is your acceleration, your second derivative, is the opposite your current position).

    Hope this helps!

  46. Woah! This is awesome! I can’t believe I found this website yesterday and I was like “Too bad I didn’t find this website some time before my exam, would’ve made my preparations much more fun and versatile”. But then I go to the exam, and it turns out I got the wrong date- it’s actually tomorrow. So I have this whole day free to read a bunch of your articles. They make me all excited about math again! Yeepeee! :D
    Thank you sir, you are a blessing!

  48. Correction: sine is bounded between -1 and 1, inclusively, if the argument is a real number. In fact, there are (infinitely many) complex solutions for sin(x) = 2. For example,
    sin(π/2 + i*ln(2 + √3)) = 2

  49. @Christian: Although it is true that sine takes on values outside of [-1,1] for complex arguments – and in fact takes on *all* complex values (more generally, this is true, with the exception of at most 1 value, for *any* non-constant analytic complex functions, by Picard’s theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picard_theorem), I would argue that this critique is misplaced here as it refers to a mathematical extension of the definition of sine to the complex plane, a space of consideration that was never once intended to be mentioned here. Sine was originally constructed to carry a certain *meaning* – to represent the path of harmonic motion (modulo amplitude) (which, by definition, doesn’t “leave” its interval of oscillation) and parameterize the unit circle (which, again by definition, cannot have a distance from the center greater than 1).

    This lesson aimed to explain the origin of, intuition behind, and exposition of: the sine wave, not the general rigorous properties of the sine function over the complex field (which belongs in a class on complex analysis, not in a blog post on high school algebra).

    In addition, @Kalid only mentions these “bounds” (he, in fact, never uses this more formal term that carried the very baggage that you intended to dispose of) within the language of “moving” and “swaying” – these already imply that we are on the real line: intuitively this is because motion implies time (or at the very least – 1 dimensional travel) which, for all intents and purposes, is “real” (as C is 2 dimensional – we cannot “trace” across the entire vector field of sine over C).

    Often concepts originally defined to mean something spacial/physical get generalized with mathematical language, and along the way lose some of the properties that originally motivated their definition in the first place – this does not mean that the explanation (or even conception) of them in those original terms is “incorrect” – there is no “one true sine function” but rather a general notion of sine with distinct appropriate definitions for different contexts. So, correction: your comment was just an interesting addendum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>