ganeshie8
  • ganeshie8
show that \(\sin(x)+\sin(x-120^{\circ})+\sin(x-240^{\circ})=0\)
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
ganeshie8
  • ganeshie8
my roomate and i are arguing about electric motors and im looking for some geometric explanation for this..
Empty
  • Empty
what's true for x=0 is always true no matter how you rotate it
Empty
  • Empty
\[e^{i x}(e^{i 2 \pi / 3} +e^{i 2 \pi 2/ 3} +e^{i 2 \pi 3/ 3}) =0\] the real part of that

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

Empty
  • Empty
imaginary part I mean, whatever, both are zero haha
Michele_Laino
  • Michele_Laino
it is a three phase system
rhr12
  • rhr12
x + 120 = t sin(t - 120) + sin(t) + sin(t + 120) = 0 sin(t)cos(120) - sin(120)cos(t) + sin(t) + sin(t)cos(120) + sin(120)cos(t) = 0 2 * cos(120) * sin(t) + sin(t) = 0 sin(t) * (2 * cos(120) + 1) = 0 sin(t) * (2 * (-1/2) + 1) = 0 sin(t) * (-1 + 1) = 0 sin(t) * 0 = 0 So, sin(t) can equal pretty much anything t = x + 120 sin(x + 120) can be anything x + 120 can be anything x can be anything There are no wrong solutions for this one.
rhr12
  • rhr12
That's all i got.
ganeshie8
  • ganeshie8
Yes he is saying delta/star and some bs which i have no idea about... but it makes sense to think in terms of roots of unity as Empty wa suggesting.. (if im interepreting correctly..)
Michele_Laino
  • Michele_Laino
|dw:1438447767342:dw|
Empty
  • Empty
x and y components of vectors are linearly independent in 2D. So in order for vectors to be in equilibrium in 2D their components must be in equilibrium too. That's what I'm saying
Empty
  • Empty
complex numbers are just a cute representation of 2d vectors I am so used to just thinking with them I forget other people aren't
ganeshie8
  • ganeshie8
|dw:1438448479126:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Confused
ganeshie8
  • ganeshie8
welcome to the club @ruhan11

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.