What is the significance of x=ii in imaginary numbers?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tomas
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Power
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression x=ii in the context of imaginary numbers and complex analysis. Participants explore the significance of this expression, including its mathematical implications and the nature of logarithms in complex numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses curiosity about the meaning of x=ii, indicating they are new to the topic of imaginary numbers.
  • Another participant suggests that understanding Taylor series is necessary to grasp the answer fully.
  • A participant derives that x=exp(-Pi/2) by taking the natural logarithm of both sides and using properties of logarithms for complex numbers.
  • It is noted that when working with complex exponents, there are infinitely many solutions due to the periodic nature of the argument in complex logarithms.
  • One participant discusses the definition of log for complex numbers, emphasizing the distinction between the principal logarithm and the general logarithm that includes multiple values.
  • A question is raised about the appropriateness of using the principal logarithm, with references to a textbook that employs it.
  • Another participant acknowledges that while the principal value is reasonable, all possible solutions should be specified unless otherwise stated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical framework for dealing with complex logarithms and the existence of multiple solutions. However, there is some disagreement regarding the use of the principal logarithm versus providing all possible solutions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of specifying which logarithm is being used and the implications of that choice on the solutions presented. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in handling logarithms of complex numbers.

tomas
I am starting imaginary numbers in school and I wondered, what is x=ii
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
e-.5[pi]
Do you know taylor series? If not, learn them, you won't understand the answer until you do.

-quick edit
 
Last edited by a moderator:
x = exp(-Pi/2)

x=ii
Taking logs to base e

ln(x) = i*ln(i)
Since ln(i)= i*Pi/2, ln(x)=-Pi/2, so raising both sides to the power of e we obtain.
x = exp(-Pi/2)

Explaination of ln(i) = -i*Pi/2

if w is a complex number such that exp(w) = z, then w = ln|z|+i*arg(z). Since |i|=1, and arg(i)=Pi/2, ln(i) turns out to be -Pi/2.
 
When working with complex exponents, remember that you will get an infinite number of answers. The standard way of solving log problems doesn't really apply here. This is how you would solve this problem:

x=i^i => x = exp(i*log(i))
This is a definition from Complex Analysis
log(i) = Log|i| + i*arg(i)
This is the definition of log(z) where z is complex. Note it is not quite the same as ln(x).
Log(x) is a real function and works exactly the same as ln(x), its just a different terminology used in math.
arg(i) is definited as the angle the 'imaginary vector' makes with the positive real axis.
|i| is the magnitude of i (absolute value), which is 1.
So, log(i) = Log(1) + i*arg(i) = 0 + i*Pi/2 + i*2*Pi*k where k is an integer (by definition of arg(z))
Thus,x = i^i = exp(i*i(Pi/2 + 2*Pi*k) = exp(-Pi/2 - 2*Pi*k) k element of Z/ (The Integers)
Which provides for an infinite number of solutions.

Hope that helps.
 
Why can't we use the principal logarithm? Apostol uses it in the analysis textbook I use, and I'm more than happy to follow his example.
 
It is certainly reasonable to use the principle value of the log, if that is what is asked for. However, if someone wants x=i^i, without specifying they only want the principle value (k=0), you need to specify all possible solutions. It would be like solving a standard quadratic, and only providing the positive solution. Its still correct, but incomplete.
 
Fair enough. That makes sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K