Compound Angle and Double Angle Formulae: From sin(A±B) to sin2A, cos2A and tan2A
~60 min · WMA13 · 2.3
WMA13 · 2.3 · 60 min
Three formulae are printed in the exam booklet — sin(A±B), cos(A±B), tan(A±B) — and three more are not, because they're built from the first three in one substitution: set B=A and sin2A, cos2A and tan2A fall straight out. Proving spec 2.3's own named identity, solving an equation that mixes a single angle with its double, and 'application to half angles' are three different-looking jobs that all come from that one move, done once, and reused every time it's needed.
Key terms in this lesson
Before you read on
Two or three questions on exactly what this lesson teaches. Being wrong here is fine — it's the fastest way to find out what to pay attention to next.
Before the letters: what sin(A+B) really equals, with two actual angles
In plain terms
Take two actual angles: A = 30° and B = 60° — no unknowns, just two numbers already known from GCSE. Add the angles first, then take sine: A + B = 90°, so sin(A+B) = sin90° = 1. Now try the guess that looks natural — sine of a sum should just be the sum of the sines: sin30° + sin60° = 0.5 + 0.866 = 1.366. That's not 1. Adding the angles first and taking sine gives a different number from taking sine of each angle separately and adding those — so whatever the real rule is, it can't be 'add the sines.' Here's what actually reaches 1: take all four building-block numbers — sin30° = 0.5, cos30° = 0.866, sin60° = 0.866, cos60° = 0.5 — and combine them as (sin30° × cos60°) + (cos30° × sin60°) = (0.5 × 0.5) + (0.866 × 0.866) = 0.25 + 0.75 = 1. That's an exact match for sin90°. Four specific numbers, multiplied crosswise in pairs and added, landed on the right answer for these two specific angles — and that crosswise-multiply-and-add pattern is the actual rule, checked here on real numbers before it gets written for angles in general.
Name what the two angles were: A and B — 30° and 60° here, but the pattern has to hold for every pair of angles, which is why it eventually gets written with letters instead of re-checked from scratch each time. The four numbers that got combined — sin30°, cos60°, cos30°, sin60° — are sinA, cosB, cosA, sinB once the specific angles are replaced by general ones, and the crosswise-multiply-then-add combination that worked above is called the compound-angle formula. Swapping the '+' for a '−' between A and B flips one of the two signs inside the formula, not both — worth noticing now, before the full sign pattern for all three formulae (sine, cosine, tangent) is set out next.
Formally
sin(A ± B) ≡ sinA cosB ± cosA sinB, printed in the exam formula booklet — the ± on the right matches the ± on the left, so this single line states both sin(A+B) and sin(A−B) at once. It is not proved in this lesson (nothing requires it to be); it is USED, exactly as it was just checked above for A=30°, B=60°, but now for any A and B at all.
What's given, and what has to come from you
Three formulae are printed in the exam booklet, and this lesson doesn't re-derive them because nothing needs to: , , and (spec 2.3). Notice the sign pattern inside each one: has a MINUS where has a PLUS, and 's denominator carries the OPPOSITE sign to its numerator — three genuinely different sign rules living in three similar-looking formulae, and mixing them up is the single most common way to lose a mark before any double-angle content is even reached.
What ISN'T printed — and is the entire content of this lesson — is what these three formulae build. Set in each one and a second, unprinted set falls out: , (in three equivalent forms) and . The specification states plainly that this second set of formulae 'will not appear in the booklet' — they have to be memorised outright, or rebuilt from the compound-angle formulae on the spot the way the next section shows, every time memory is in doubt.
One thing spec 2.3 explicitly does NOT ask for, stated in its own guidance: the half-angle substitution. It's a real and useful technique elsewhere in mathematics, but this specification names it as excluded — so nothing in this lesson builds on it, and mastering it is effort spent outside what this paper actually examines.
Why bother — three jobs one derivation opens up
— spec 2.3's own named example of an identity to prove — has three trig terms mixing two different angles, and , and no single-angle identity applies to something shaped like that until a double-angle formula connects back to . The same is true of an equation like : two different angles, until a substitution turns it into one.
The specification names three jobs directly: proving identities of exactly this mixed-angle shape, solving equations that reduce to something solvable once the substitution is made, and 'application to half angles' — reading the same formula backwards, from a double angle down to its own half. All three come from one derivation, done once, in the next section.
Mechanism
Deriving sin2A and cos2A — the same substitution, twice
Take the for sine, , and substitute — not a new formula, the exact same one with both letters told to be the same angle: . So — the for sine is nothing but the sum formula with set equal to , and every line of the derivation is already available from a formula printed on the sheet. Do the identical substitution to the compound-angle formula for cosine, : , so is the first, most direct double-angle form for cosine — and unlike sine, cosine doesn't stop there, because can be rewritten twice more using the one identity relating the two squares, (spec 2.2, memorised). Eliminate by substituting : . Eliminate instead, substituting : . All three — , , — are the SAME quantity, not three formulae to memorise separately: one formula wearing three algebraically equivalent outfits, and which one is useful depends entirely on what the rest of the question already has sitting in it (the next block gives the actual rule for choosing). None of , any form of , or is printed in the formula booklet — every one of them has to be rebuildable from the compound-angle formula that IS printed, on demand, exactly as just shown.
Mechanism
Which form of cos2A to reach for — and reading the same formula backwards for half angles
Three forms of means three different jobs. Reach for when the target is a factorisation — it's a genuine difference of two squares, , useful the moment a question already has or sitting in it elsewhere. Reach for when the rest of the equation is already written in (or ), so introducing a term would just create a second function to eliminate all over again. Reach for under the mirror-image condition: the rest of the equation is already in . Choosing the WRONG one of the three doesn't produce a wrong answer outright — all three are equally true — but it produces an equation with two trig functions mixed together where a good choice would have produced one, and the extra function then has to be eliminated by some OTHER identity, turning a one-step substitution into a two-step detour. Spec 2.3's guidance also names 'application to half angles' as required content, and it is the identical substitution read in the other direction: instead of using to describe an angle twice the size of , set and use it to describe in terms of its OWN half. falls straight out of the form with no new derivation at all, and rearranging gives — a genuine half-angle identity, built from the same formula, just read back to front.
x-axis: x (degrees) · y-axis: y
- C1 · y = cos2x
- The ordinary cosine curve, run at double speed: it completes one full up-and-down cycle in 180°, half the width of the plain cosine curve, because doubling the angle inside a function halves how much x it takes to sweep through one full period.
- C2 · y = cos²x − sin²x = 2cos²x − 1 = 1 − 2sin²x
- Three different-looking algebraic expressions, and all three trace the identical curve as C1 — not three separate graphs that happen to look similar, the same one, because cos²x + sin²x ≡ 1 is used to move between them and an identity never changes the value of the expression it's applied to.
- x = 60°: all four expressions give −0.5
- cos120° = −0.5. Check the other three at x = 60°: cos²60° − sin²60° = 0.25 − 0.75 = −0.5; 2cos²60° − 1 = 0.5 − 1 = −0.5; 1 − 2sin²60° = 1 − 1.5 = −0.5. All four land on the same number, because they are the same number, dressed four ways.
- Period 180°, not 360°
- y = cosx returns to its starting value every 360°. y = cos2x returns every 180°, because the angle fed into cosine has already doubled by the time x has advanced by half as much — the graph looks compressed horizontally, not changed in height.
Common error: Writing cos2x as cos²x − 1, or as 1 − cos²x — both incomplete forms that drop a term from the real identity.
Correct: The three real double-angle-for-cosine forms are cos²x − sin²x, 2cos²x − 1 and 1 − 2sin²x — each one uses BOTH cos²x and sin²x, or has already substituted cos²x + sin²x ≡ 1 into both. cos²x − 1 and 1 − cos²x are each missing a factor of 2 on the constant term, produced by half-remembering one of the three real forms rather than building it from the substitution fresh.
examiner-report · Oct 2020 · Q1
Same question, every valid method
Prove that . (Pearson's own specification guidance names this exact identity as a worked example of what students should be able to prove under spec 2.3 — quoted directly from the spec's own guidance column, not from any exam paper or mark scheme, the same way the WMA12 lesson on trigonometric equations used a spec guidance example directly rather than treating it as a past-paper reproduction.)
2 valid methods · every one reaches True for every real — proved below by two independent, equally valid routes. · 3 marks available
- 01M1
is the compound-angle formula for cosine, printed on the formula sheet. The left side to be proved has exactly this shape, with , : .
Method mark for recognising the given expression as the compound-angle expansion of cos(A−B) run in reverse, and correctly identifying A=2x, B=x.
- 02A1
So .
Accuracy mark for correctly writing the compressed form, cos(2x−x), from the matched A and B.
- 03A1
, as required.
Accuracy mark for simplifying the angle and matching the given right-hand side exactly (cso).
Two working lines once the pattern is spotted — the fastest route on the page, but only once it's recognised; missing the match means starting over with the other method entirely, so it's worth trying first and abandoning quickly, never forcing.
In your own words
In one sentence: why does substituting into the compound-angle formulae — rather than memorising , and as three unconnected rules — mean you can always rebuild any of them from scratch if your memory of the exact result slips under exam pressure?
Worked, in full
The full method for cos2θ = sinθ, 0° ≤ θ < 360°
- 01
Spot the mixed angle: one term is , the other is — no single-angle identity applies until is replaced. The rest of the equation is already in , so the form that clears entirely into one function is , not either of the cosine-only forms, which would leave a nobody asked for.
Earns: M1 — attempts the substitution cos2θ ≡ 1−2sin²θ into the given equation. The mark is for choosing a form that produces a single-function equation, not for the arithmetic that follows.
- 02
Substituting: . Rearrange so the whole equation is on one side, in decreasing powers: — a genuine 3-term quadratic, now written in exactly the way used to stand in an ordinary quadratic.
Earns: A1 — the correct quadratic in sinθ, dependent on the method mark above.
- 03
Factorise: . [Check: expanding gives . ✓] So , giving or .
Earns: dM1 — solves their 3-term quadratic in sinθ to critical values, by factorisation, formula or completing the square (the general principles credit all three equally). Dependent on the method mark at stage 1.
- 04
Solve for : the calculator's principal value is , and sine is positive in the first and second quadrants, so the second solution is . Two solutions: .
Earns: A1 — both solutions from sinθ = ½.
- 05
Solve for : this is the extreme value, touched at exactly one point in a full revolution — the bottom of the unit circle, . It is not doubled the way was, because there is no second-quadrant partner at a minimum.
Earns: A1 — the single solution from sinθ = −1, correctly NOT doubled — the same extreme-value case the prerequisite lesson on trigonometric equations already established for sinθ = 1.
- 06
State the full solution set: . Three solutions in total, not four — because one of the two factors landed on an extreme value of sine, which only contributes once per revolution instead of twice.
Earns: Final consolidation — no separate mark scheme code, but stating the COMPLETE set (all three, no more, no fewer) is what part (b)-style questions of this shape are actually graded on.
Source — Question paper, Jan 2023
"In this question you must show all stages of your working. Solutions relying entirely on calculator technology are not acceptable."
Complete it yourself
Complete the chain — derive tan2A from tan(A+B), and check it
- 01
The compound-angle formula for tan, printed in the booklet: . Setting substitutes the SAME expression, , into both letters: .
Marked, line by line
, for . (a) Show that . (3) (b) Hence solve for . (5) — VERIDIAN-original question, built to pair a 'show that' identity part with a 'hence solve' part the way spec 2.3's own guidance pairs proving identities with solving equations in a given interval. Not a reproduction of any past-paper question, and the per-line mark allocations below are modelled on verified mark-scheme conventions rather than copied from a real scheme, which for an original question does not exist.
8 marks available
(a) — 3 marks
- 01M1
Method mark for expanding the square correctly into three terms — a squared two-term bracket always expands to three terms, and dropping the cross term 2sinθcosθ is the most common way to lose this mark before any trig identity is even used.
- 02A1
Accuracy mark for recognising and applying sin²θ + cos²θ ≡ 1 (spec 2.2, memorised) to the first two terms — the step that turns three terms back into two.
- 03A1
, so , as required.
Accuracy mark, dependent on the method mark, for the final double-angle substitution and matching the given answer exactly (cso) — the whole point of a 'show that' instruction is that every line up to this one is visible, not just asserted.
(b) — 5 marks
- 101M1
becomes, using part (a), , so .
Method mark for substituting the proven identity into the equation — the entire reason part (a) was asked before part (b): 'hence' means use what was just proved, not start again from (sinθ+cosθ)².
- 102M1
Because the unknown inside sine is , not , widen the interval to match it first: means — twice the sweep, so up to twice as many solutions for before converting back.
Method mark for correctly transforming the interval for the substituted variable 2θ before solving — the interval-solving habit from the prerequisite lesson, now applied to a doubled range rather than the original one.
- 103A1
, and sine is positive in the first two quadrants each half-turn, so within : .
Accuracy mark for all four values of 2θ — two full 'up-and-down' pairs, one per 360° of the doubled range, not just the first pair.
- 104A1
Halve each value to recover : .
Accuracy mark for converting every value of 2θ back to θ — dividing by 2 is easy to forget on the later values specifically, once the first pair has already been converted and attention has moved on.
- 105A1
All four lie in (the ORIGINAL interval, not the doubled one), so the complete solution set is .
Final accuracy mark for stating the complete set against the original interval — a value of 2θ satisfying the doubled range is meaningless on its own; only the resulting θ, checked against the question's actual interval, counts as an answer.
Beyond the spec
Spec 2.3's own guidance line names the DOUBLE-angle formulae directly — sin2A, cos2A, tan2A — and never uses the words 'triple angle.' That is the only sense in which what follows is 'beyond' the spec: it is NOT beyond what actually gets examined. A real WMA13 paper has already set exactly this identity as a 4-mark 'show that' question — Oct 2020, Q5(a): 'Show that sin 3x ≡ 3 sin x − 4 sin³x' — marked in the identical four steps derived below, method mark for method mark (the real mark scheme is quoted at the end). It sits in this beyond-spec slot because the spec's own wording never names a third formula to memorise, not because it's unlikely to appear on a paper: the SKILL this section demonstrates — that the same substitution keeps working past B=A — is precisely what a real exam has already asked students to produce.
Write as — a sum of two angles already covered, one of them itself a double angle — and expand with the ordinary compound-angle formula for sine: . Substitute the double-angle forms already derived: , and — choosing the form for specifically because the target is an expression purely in — . One function still remains to eliminate: . Substitute : . So — reached with nothing beyond the compound-angle formula, the double-angle forms it already produced, and cos²θ+sin²θ≡1, the same three ingredients used everywhere else in this lesson, just combined one extra time. This is not a hypothetical extension: Pearson has set exactly this identity, with in place of , as a real 4-mark 'show that' question (Oct 2020, Q5(a)), and the real mark scheme awards it in the identical four steps just shown — M1 for writing and expanding with the compound-angle formula; a second M1 for substituting correct double-angle identities for both and ; a doubly-dependent ddM1 — dependent on BOTH preceding method marks, not just the one directly before it — for eliminating the remaining via ; and a starred A1* for reaching the given answer with every line correctly notated (the scheme names, among other slips, writing bare '' with no argument in place of — a real notation error it penalises even when every line of maths is right). The examiner report for that series records nearly three-quarters of candidates scoring full marks, with most of the remaining loss coming from exactly the trap named elsewhere in this lesson as 'unhelpful-cos2a-form-chosen': reaching for or for first, before recovering to the form this derivation uses from the start.
Named traps
- wrong-double-angle-cosine-form
- Confirmed verbatim on a real WMA13 exam question of exactly this lesson's worked-chain shape — "Solve, for 0° ⩽ x < 360°, the equation 2cos2x = 7cosx" (Oct 2020, Q1, 5 marks; NOT a "prove"/"show that" question — an equation to solve by the same substitute-then-3TQ route as this lesson's own worked chain). The examiner report records it as "generally well done with about two-thirds of the candidates scoring full marks" — so this is a minority-but-real error, not the modal one — "where errors occurred, these were mainly writing cos 2x as cos²x − 1 or 1 − cos²x, or incorrectly stating 4 cos²x − 2 = 2 cos x as the first step, implying an incorrect identity due to a lack of brackets": half-remembering one of the three real forms (cos²x−sin²x, 2cos²x−1, 1−2sin²x) and dropping the factor of 2, or — the second, distinct error — writing 2×2cos²x−1 without the bracket around (2cos²x−1) it needs, which the real mark scheme flags by name: "2 × 2cos²x − 1 = 7cosx is M0 unless the correct identity has been previously stated or recovery occurs." Both errors cost the same mark for the same underlying reason: the coefficient of 2 outside the bracket has to survive the substitution, and it is exactly that 2 — as a factor, or as a bracket protecting it — that goes missing.
- incomplete-working-on-a-prove-that
- The single most repeated failure mode on this topic across multiple series, and not a maths error at all: "It was noticeable in this series that many candidates omitted important lines when proceeding to the given solution resulting in the loss of some vital marks" (Jan 2022, general summary). The identical discipline is documented independently outside this topic too — a Jan 2022 report on a differentiation "show that" question notes "many good candidates lost marks here for merely writing down the given answer from a correct dx/dy without any intermediate lines," cited here only as evidence the same general marking principle (every line on the way to a GIVEN answer is part of what is marked, not optional scaffolding) recurs across different question types, not as a trig-specific incident in its own right. On a "prove" or "show that" instruction, the double-angle substitution line itself is one of the lines being marked.
- dividing-away-a-common-trig-factor
- A genuinely common algebra trap once a double-angle form has been substituted into an equation like sin2θ = sinθ: 2sinθcosθ = sinθ looks, on sight, like something to simplify by dividing both sides by sinθ, leaving 2cosθ = 1. That step is illegal exactly when sinθ could be zero, and it silently discards every solution where sinθ = 0 actually satisfies the ORIGINAL equation. Rearrange to zero and factorise instead — sinθ(2cosθ − 1) = 0 — so both branches, sinθ = 0 and cosθ = ½, survive. The rule isn't specific to trig: never divide an equation by an expression that could itself be zero, only ever factor it out.
- unhelpful-cos2a-form-chosen
- All three forms of cos2A are equally TRUE, so picking the 'wrong' one never produces a wrong answer — it produces an equation that still has two different trig functions mixed together, when a better choice would have collapsed it to one. Substituting cos²A − sin²A into an equation that is otherwise entirely in sinA doesn't simplify anything; it introduces a fresh cos²A term that then has to be eliminated with sin²A + cos²A ≡ 1 anyway — the same identity a better initial choice would have used once, not twice. Before substituting, check what function the rest of the equation is already written in, and match the cos2A form to it.
- half-angle-substitution-misread
- "Half the angle" and "half the value" are not the same operation, and the notation makes them easy to blur: sin(θ/2) means the sine of half the angle, an entirely different number from (sinθ)/2, half the sine's value. The half-angle identities in this lesson — sin²(θ/2) ≡ (1−cosθ)/2 and its cosine equivalent — only come out right if the /2 is read as dividing the ANGLE going into the substitution A=θ/2, not as an operation performed on sinθ or cosθ afterwards. Write the substitution out explicitly ('let A = θ/2') before touching the double-angle formula, rather than trying to halve an angle and a trig function in the same mental step.
Retrieval — with feedback on every choice
Which expression is equal to for every value of ?
, where is acute (). What is ?
. What is ?
To rewrite as an equation entirely in , which form of should replace it?
Which response to 'Prove that ' is certain to earn full marks?
Using with , which expression equals ?
- sin(A±B) ≡ sinAcosB ± cosAsinB; cos(A±B) ≡ cosAcosB ∓ sinAsinB; tan(A±B) ≡ (tanA±tanB)/(1∓tanAtanB) — all on the formula sheet.
- Set B=A in each: sin2A ≡ 2sinAcosA; cos2A ≡ cos²A−sin²A ≡ 2cos²A−1 ≡ 1−2sin²A; tan2A ≡ 2tanA/(1−tan²A) — none on the sheet.
- Pick the cos2A form matching what's already there: sin² present → 1−2sin²A; cos² present → 2cos²A−1; factoring a difference of squares → cos²A−sin²A.
- Solving sin2θ=k or cos2θ=k directly: widen the interval to match 2θ before solving, then halve every answer and re-check against the ORIGINAL interval.
- Proving an identity: show every line, including the double-angle substitution itself — a matching final line is not evidence it was actually reached.
Not affiliated with or endorsed by Pearson Edexcel. Every quotation and figure attributed to a mark scheme, specification, or examiner report in this lesson was independently verified against the primary Pearson document, not carried over from prior course material. Every question in this lesson — prequestion, worked chain, chain drill, marked solution and MCQ alike — is VERIDIAN-original wording, with one deliberate exception: the identity cos x cos 2x + sin x sin 2x ≡ cos x used in the method-comparison block is Pearson's own published specification guidance example, not an exam question, used the same way an earlier WMA12 lesson used a spec guidance example directly. Because the remaining questions are original, the per-line mark allocations attached to them are modelled on verified mark-scheme conventions (what M, A and B marks mean, when follow-through applies, when a mark is dependent on a prior method mark) rather than transcribed from a real mark scheme, which for an original question does not exist.
Which expression is equal to for every value of ?
Correct — exactly what substituting into produces, before any further rewriting with . (Also equal to and — all three are the same quantity.)
- B
A real, recorded exam error — examiners note candidates writing exactly this in place of one of the genuine forms (Oct 2020, Q1). It's missing a factor of 2: the real form built from is , not .
- C
This treats doubling the angle as if it directly changed the OUTPUT by a fixed amount, the way shifts a graph up — but is a genuinely different function of , not plus or minus a constant, and no such simple shift exists for cosine.
- D
Close to a real form but missing a square: the correct identity is , with squared. Dropping the square is an easy slip once the '2' and the '−1' are remembered correctly but the exponent isn't.
Traps tested: Wrong double angle cosine form · Double angle treated as additive shift · Cos squared exponent dropped
, where is acute (). What is ?
Correct. Since is acute, , so (the 3-4-5 triangle). Then — or, checking with the other form, . Both agree, because they're the same quantity.
- B
This is — the formula for , applied to a question. Sharing the same two ingredients, and , doesn't make the two formulae interchangeable.
- C
This is , not . A difference of two squares, , is not the same expression as the square of a difference, — expanding the second gives , an extra cross term the first doesn't have.
- D
This is — the sign inside the identity flipped. It's also a value cosine can never take: is bounded between and for every real angle, and is an immediate sign something went wrong before further checking is even needed.
Traps tested: Sin2A formula used for cos2A · Difference of squares confused with square of difference · Sign error in double angle cosine form
. What is ?
Correct. .
- B
The denominator is missing its square: this computes , using alone where the formula needs . The denominator of is , not .
- C
The sign in the denominator is flipped: this uses instead of . The '+' belongs to (a different identity, spec 2.2) — the double-angle tangent formula's denominator is a minus.
- D
This computes — squaring the wrong instance of and dropping the fraction entirely. is a ratio, , never a product.
Traps tested: Tan squared not formed in denominator · Sign of denominator flipped · Tan2A formula invented
To rewrite as an equation entirely in , which form of should replace it?
Correct. The equation already has a term; substituting the form of that's ALSO written in means nothing new is introduced. (It gives , i.e. — one function, one equation.)
- B
True, but unhelpful here: it introduces a fresh term into an equation that otherwise has none, which then has to be eliminated with anyway — extra work a better choice avoids entirely.
- C
The same problem as the other cosine-only form: it adds a term the equation didn't have, instead of matching the that's already there.
- D
This isn't one of the three real forms at all — it treats doubling the angle as doubling the function's value directly, the way multiplying by 2 doubles . Cosine doesn't scale that way; is a different function of , not twice .
Traps tested: Unhelpful cos2a form chosen · Double angle treated as linear scaling
Which response to 'Prove that ' is certain to earn full marks?
- Expands the bracket to three terms, applies to two of them, then identifies the remaining term as — every line shown
Correct — the complete method, with the identity that does the actual work (spotting ) shown explicitly, not just asserted.
- BWrites ', as required' directly, with no working shown
This is the exact failure documented on real 'prove that' questions on this topic — jumping straight to the given answer. A 'show that'/'prove' instruction is marked on the presence of the intermediate lines, not just on whether the final line matches; with no working, no method mark is available to award.
- CSubstitutes into both sides, confirms they're equal, and concludes the identity is proved
One numeric value matching is consistent with the identity being true — it isn't proof that it's true for every . An identity claims equality for ALL values of the variable; checking one value can only ever disprove an identity (by finding a mismatch), never establish one.
- DExpands the bracket correctly, but writes 'which equals 1' after with no reference to the identity used to get there
The value is right and the justification is missing — is itself a memorised identity being invoked, and 'show that' marking expects that invocation to be visible, not just the arithmetic it enables.
Traps tested: Incomplete working on a prove that · Proof by single example
Using with , which expression equals ?
Correct. Setting in gives ; rearranging for gives exactly .
- B
This is the OTHER half-angle identity — it equals , not , and comes from the form of instead of the form. The two half-angle results are mirror images, and it's easy to reach for the wrong one.
- C
Missing both the square and the factor of 2. The identity relates to , doubled — not to on its own.
- D
This is the double-angle formula for , built from the FULL angle — the wrong identity entirely for a question about the HALF angle .
Traps tested: Half angle form confused with 1 plus cos · Half angle square and factor dropped · Sin2A formula misapplied to half angle question
Practice this for real
This site teaches the mechanism; the exam is sat on Pearson's own real questions. Go find and attempt these yourself — nothing here substitutes for actually sitting a timed paper.
- Examiner report
- Oct 2020 · Q1 — cited directly in this lesson
- Question paper
- Jan 2023 — cited directly in this lesson
Select International Advanced Level → Mathematics → any series, then look for WMA13.
Up next
Harmonic Form: Writing a cos t + b sin t as R cos(t ± a)
Every sum a\cos\theta + b\sin\theta is one wave wearing a disguise — R\cos(\theta \mp \alpha) — and finding R and \alpha is what turns an equation with two tangled trig terms into one you already know how to solve.
50 min