Waste less time on Facebook — follow Brilliant.
×

really complex....

please comment...

Note by Trishit Chandra
2 years, 2 months ago

No vote yet
1 vote

Comments

Sort by:

Top Newest

My text book named additional mathematics quoted that a and b must be real numbers for all convenience you mentioned. Basically, imaginary numbers or complex numbers posses many possibilities while staying in a function but ought to be an only value when they are not. Example: x^2 = -1, x can be + j or - j but Sqrt (-1) or j itself cannot choose to own both values. Another example: e^x = -1, x can be -3 Pi j, - Pi j, Pi j, 3 Pi j, 5 Pi j and etc. Here, we define principal value for Ln -1 which is j Pi.

Complex number undoubtedly have been studied by many people including mathematicians of course and it is found to be something important that unable to be denied by people. Without complex number, there are many logical outcomes that cannot be explained and topics remained incomplete. The most significant example is solution to x^3 + p x + q = 0. We may refuse quadratic formula when j appears, but we cannot do the same for cubic formula.

When we realize that something ought to survive, we shall have thousands of reasons to prove them right; on the other hand, we could have ten thousands of reasons instead just to reject them. Towards the surviving path, we ought to study and understand the feature of complex number rather than to go for ways that may find them some flaws.

When we do in such a way that j suddenly becomes -j, we ought to realize its nature and also the meaning of a principal value. In other words, we shall find NO TROUBLE at all when we don't do in a way that purposely try to reveal their nature of many values. Sincerely, I personally find that complex numbers are as true as they can be.

Just try our best to cope with their features. Then, we shall find that Complex Number is the way towards all truth. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket Indeed. A lot of times, we memorize rules without recalling what are the conditions under which it holds. In this case, as you pointed out, the rule only applies for real numbers, and cannot be applied to complex numbers.

This is why in Rules of Exponents, we added in a warning about when these rules hold:


Other common instance of forgetting conditions is applying AM-GM to negative numbers. Calvin Lin Staff · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin I meant not all convenience are applicable if not real number, not meant for not applicable to complex number. I concluded from analysis that when there comes with fractional index with simplest co-prime, example (-1)^(5/ 3) or (-1)^(7/ 2), always take the effect of its denominator before numerator. Without list of black and white one by one, we just need to emphasize that we conclude according to whatever reasonable. I think 0^0 = 1 should be included in the list. As its limit tells, 0^0 = 0^(1 - 1) = 0/ 0 doesn't deny the fact for it to be 1. 0/ 0 includes 1 but generally something instead of invalid. Indeterminate is just something but we cannot know one of them in general to satisfy particular need to be sole definable value. Thanks anyway for providing the list for me to do some revision and thinking. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin thank you sir Lu Chee Ket for helping me to clear my doubt and also thanks to calvin lin. Trishit Chandra · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

Proof by contradiction

I can write -

\( i^2 = \sqrt{-1}\times\sqrt{-1}\)

According to you ,

\( i^2 = \sqrt{-1}\times\sqrt{-1} = \sqrt{-1\times-1} = 1\) - this is a contradiction as \(i^2 = -1\) Megh Choksi · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Megh Choksi yes exactly i've the confusion with the contradiction. Trishit Chandra · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Trishit Chandra Good for doubting. This is the spirit that we should request to ourselves. If you truly prove it incorrect, then I personally feel happy to admit the fact. This should be our correct attitude. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket thankkkk u sir Lu Chee Ket for encouraging me...i will be highly obliged if you kindly give a link of your book. Trishit Chandra · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Trishit Chandra Didn't get your exact meaning. Anyway, no book from me that helps in this topic. I only wrote about general number. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket In the first comment you wrote that your text book named additional mathematics quoted.........Thats why I thought that you wrote a book about this topic. But if you write about general number then you can also send me that link. Trishit Chandra · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Trishit Chandra The only book published contained mistakes despite the concept. I had stopped giving to people since long ago. Upon my own need to work on it, only then I gave to one or two people. I may produce new version in future. I think this has not been the proper moment that I could introduce to you. Not easy to get help to start developing. Anyway, thanks for your concern. Calvin Lin had posted some immediate introduction to questions of your most concern. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket Ok thank you sir. And nice to meet you. Trishit Chandra · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

@Trishit Chandra Nice to meet you. Lu Chee Ket · 2 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...