5

I have been interested recently about hyperbolic trigonometric functions and their angles.

With regular trigonometric functions, we conceptualize the angle $\theta$ in radians as the arc length $L$ in the unit circle, or the ratio of the arc length $L$ divided by the radius $r$. So we have

$$\theta = \frac{L}{r}$$

It is also possible to visualize the angle as twice the area of the bounded sector by the same angle, we have

enter image description here

So the area of the bounded sector is directly proportional the angle in radians.

We can extend this definition for the hyperbola where an hyperbolic angle is the half of the area defined by a bounded sector

enter image description here

Is it also possible the conceptualize the hyperbolic angle (in hyperbolic radians) as a ratio of the length of an hyperbolic arc over the radius of the hyperbola as we do for the circle, thus obtaining a proportionality between the hyperbolic sector area and the hyperbolic angle in hyperbolic radians?

Lee Mosher
  • 120,280
emandret
  • 926
  • 1
    I am putting a response here instead of under my answer b/c the moderators are saying that string is too long. The post you mention looks like an opinion letter with no peer review. Therefore b*s*. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 12 '20 at 01:50

2 Answers2

4

You can, but it requires a little ingenuity.

It should be obvious that if you try to define the length of the arc via the usual Euclidean measure

$L=\int\sqrt{dy^2+dx^2}=\int{\sqrt{(dy/dx)^2+1}}~dx$

you will get nowhere near where you want to go.

Instead define an alternative, non-Euclidean metric:

$L=\int\sqrt{dy^2-dx^2}=\int{\sqrt{(dy/dx)^2-1}}~dx$

Let us see what this metric gives for the hyperbola defined by $x=\cosh t, y=\sinh t$:

$dy^2-dx^2=(\cosh^2t-\sinh^2t)dt^2=dt^2$

So we may render the differential length as $dt$ and then integrating from $t=0$ to $t=\alpha$ gives, indeed, $\alpha$ "hyperbolic radians".

You may want to look up how proper time and distance intervals are defined in Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity:

In special relativity, however, the interweaving of spatial and temporal coordinates generates the concept of an invariant interval, denoted as ${\displaystyle \Delta s^{2}}$:

${\displaystyle \Delta s^{2}\;{\overset {def}{=}}\;c^{2}\Delta t^{2}-(\Delta x^{2}+\Delta y^{2}+\Delta z^{2})}$[note 6]


Given the comments, the question is posed: Can we derive the hyperbolic sine and cosine a priori from the arc length definition used above?

Our problem may be stated as follows: How do $x$ and $y$ vary with arc length, defined by the metric

$ds^2=dy^2-dx^2$

from an initial point $(1,0)$ along the curve

$x^2-y^2=1$?

Begin by differentiating the equation of the hyperbola:

$2xdx-2ydy =0$

$\dfrac{dx}{dy}=\dfrac{y}{x}$

Substituting this into the metric definition and isolating the derivative leads to

$(\dfrac{ds}{dy})^2=\dfrac{1}{y^2+1}$

$(\dfrac{dy}{ds})^2={y^2+1}$

To solve this last equation we can differentiate it. Using the Chain Rule:

$2\dfrac{dy}{ds}\dfrac{d^2y}{ds^2}=2y\dfrac{dy}{ds}$

We cannot have $dy/ds=\sqrt{y^2+1}=0$, so:

$\dfrac{d^2y}{ds^2}=y$

and by the usual methodology for linear differential equations with constant coefficients

$y=Ae^s+Be^{-s}$

We need two initial conditions. First from the problem statement we must have $y=0$ at $s=0$. Second, $(\dfrac{dy}{ds})^2={y^2+1}$ implies $dy/ds=1$ at $y=0$ which in turn was just matched with $s=0$ (positive $s$ is taken to be positive $y$, which is basically just a sign convention). From these conditions is obtained

$\color{blue}{y=\dfrac{e^s-e^{-s}}{2}\overset{\rm def}{=}\sinh s}$

And then it's all algebra, using the fact that $(e^s+e^{-s})^2-(e^s-e^{-s})^2=4$ and the curve is confined to positive $x$ by construction:

$\color{blue}{x=\sqrt{1+y^2}=\dfrac{e^s+e^{-s}}{2}\overset{\rm def}{=}\cosh s}$

So, the result of a displacement of length $L$ from $(1,0)$ along $x^2-y^2=1$ may indeed be rendered as $(\cosh L, \sinh L)$.

hbghlyj
  • 2,115
Oscar Lanzi
  • 39,403
  • 1
    So the very definition of the hyperbolic cosine and sine must be prior to what we call the hyperbolic angle, since to get the hyperbola arc length, we must involve them in the integral calculation. Same can apply with the arc length formula for the circle. So I ask myself if the “original” angle definition is in fact twice the area bounded by the sector, instead of the arc length over the radius. – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 17:54
  • Hard for me to say. I first learned the hyperbolic functions as just the exponential combinations. I therefore have no clue about the origin of the hyperbolic arguments. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 11 '20 at 18:07
  • 1
    in fact, that may be the definition of an angle, to think of the bounded area rather than the arc length. Since knowing the arc length require the angle. – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 18:08
  • Check out what I just did. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 11 '20 at 20:26
  • Why the regular Euclidean measure method (using Pythagorean’s theorem) will not work for measuring the hyperbola arc length? Normally this should give a good approximation using the integral, no? – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 22:27
  • I talk specifically about Lorentzian pseudo-metric system, which of course I didn’t know about. – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 22:35
  • The strange part is why did you changed $\sqrt{dx^2 + dy^2}$ to $\sqrt{dx^2 - dy^2}$ – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 22:47
  • Actually I used $\sqrt{dy^2-dx^2}$ because ... well, because. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 11 '20 at 23:17
  • I don’t get it... why would the arc length integral using cumulative sum of infinitesimals work for the circle, the parabola and not the hyperbola? Seems counter-intuitive from the mathematical POV. Can you clarify the latter? – emandret Jan 11 '20 at 23:36
  • 1
    Ok, I have maybe grasped the “intuitive” aspect. The Minkowski diagram and the Lorentz transformation rules show that the equivalent of the Pythagorean’s theorem is obtained using the other expression, am I right? – emandret Jan 12 '20 at 00:05
  • 1
    Yes, looks like you learned a little about space-time, no? Ran out of space, they want to move this to chat, therefore I am done. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 12 '20 at 00:19
  • https://www.academia.edu/37725068/Einsteins_Equation_of_Space-Time_ds_2_c_2_dt_2_dx_2_dy_2_dz_2_is_a_Mathematical_Absurdity_as_it_is_Equivalent_to_ds_2_ds_2_dx_2_dy_2_dz_2 what do you think of that @OscarLanzi? – emandret Jan 12 '20 at 01:25
  • @OscarLanzi if I had point on a hyperbola $x^2-y^2=9$, say $A=(3\cosh(\frac{\pi}{16}),3\sinh(\frac{\pi}{16}))$, then I could draw a line between the origin $O$ and the point $A$. What would be the slope of that line in terms of degrees? – Alexander Cska Oct 30 '23 at 17:58
  • That is a separate question. Please ask it separately, and if it is some form of homework be prepared to show your own workings. – Oscar Lanzi Oct 30 '23 at 18:11
  • @OscarLanzi I get it already $\arctan( \tanh{\alpha})$ is the angle between the ray and the origin, where $\alpha$ is the hyperbolic angle. I just think that the explanation of wiki is misleading. – Alexander Cska Oct 30 '23 at 18:47
2

The red region in your diagram can be parameterized as $x=\rho\cosh\phi,\,y=\rho\sinh\phi$ for $\rho\in[0,\,1],\,\phi\in[0,\,a]$. We've thus related Cartesian coordinates to another coordinate system, with Jacobian matrix$$J=\left(\begin{array}{cc} x_{\rho} & x_{\phi}\\ y_{\rho} & y_{\phi} \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc} \cosh\phi & \rho\sinh\phi\\ \sinh\phi & \rho\cosh\phi \end{array}\right),$$of determinant $\rho$, so $dxdy=\rho d\rho d\phi$. So the red area is$$\int_0^1\rho d\rho\int_0^a d\phi=\frac12a,$$but you already knew that. Meanwhile, the conditions$$dx=\cosh\phi d\rho+\rho\sinh\phi d\phi,\,dy=\sinh\phi d\rho+\rho\cosh\phi d\phi$$simplify on the $\rho=1$ arc to$$dx=\sinh\phi d\phi,\,dy=\cosh\phi d\phi\implies ds=\sqrt{\cosh 2\phi}d\phi.$$The Euclidean arc length is therefore$$\int_0^a\sqrt{\cosh 2\phi}d\phi=\int_0^a\sqrt{1+2\sinh^2\phi}d\phi=-2iE\bigg(\frac{ia}{2}\bigg|2\bigg)$$in terms of elliptic integrals. By contrast, $ds=\sqrt{dy^2-dx^2}$ gives the desired result with a Lorentzian pseudometric, as @OscarLanzi explained.

Oscar Lanzi
  • 39,403
J.G.
  • 115,835
  • It also works the other way, mathematically, but with a twist. If you try to use the Lorentzian metric on the circle you get elliptic functions, except this time they go complex as you get >45° from (1,0). Special relativity, of course, forbids that in physical systems when $x$ is spatial and $y$ is temporal. – Oscar Lanzi Jan 11 '20 at 18:37
  • @OscarLanzi I don't really see why time comes into the equation here, there is no time since I just want a arc length measure. – emandret Feb 09 '20 at 22:20
  • In relativity, time intervals are lengths. Of course. – Oscar Lanzi Feb 09 '20 at 22:39