What is Euler's identity really saying?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MadViolinist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity
AI Thread Summary
Euler's identity, expressed as e^(iπ) + 1 = 0, links five fundamental mathematical constants: e, i, π, 1, and 0. This connection arises from the definition of the complex exponential function, which can be derived using power series expansions for exponential, sine, and cosine functions. By substituting the imaginary unit into the exponential function, it can be shown that e^(ix) equals cos(x) + i sin(x). When x is set to π, the identity simplifies to e^(iπ) = -1, reinforcing the relationship between these constants. The discussion emphasizes that while the identity is profound, its derivation is straightforward and rooted in established mathematical principles.
MadViolinist
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
So it is true that ei∏+1=0. But what does this mean? Why are all these numbers linked?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
MadViolinist said:
So it is true that ei∏+1=0. But what does this mean? Why are all these numbers linked?



They are linked precisely by that equation, and since the equality e^{i\theta}:=\cos\theta+i\sin\theta\,\,,\,\,\theta\in\mathbb{R}\,\, follows at once say from the definition

of the complex exponential function as power series (or as limit of a sequence), the above identity is really trivial.

DonAntonio
 
Look at the MacLaurin series for those functions:
e^x= 1+ x+ x^2/2!+ x^3/3!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ x^n/n!
cos(x)= 1- x^2/2!+ x^4/4!- x^6/6!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ (-1)^nx^{2n}/(2n)!
sin(x)= x- x^3/3!+ x^5/5!- x^7/7!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ (-1)^nx^{2n+1}/(2n)!

If you replace x with the imaginary number ix (x is still real) that becomes
e^{ix}= 1+ ix+ (ix)^2/2!+ (ix)^3/3!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ (ix)^n/n!
e^{ix}= 1+ ix+ i^2x^2/2!+ i^3x^3/3!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot+ i^nx^n/n!

But it is easy to see that, since i^2= -1, (i)^3= (i)^2(i)= -i, (i)^4= (i^3)(i)= -i(i)= -(-1)= 1 so then it starts all over: i^5= (i^5)i= i, etc. That is, all even powers of i are 1 if the power is 0 mod 4 and -1 if it is 2 mod 4. All odd powers are i if the power is 1 mod 4 and -i if it is 3 mod 4.

e^{ix}= 1+ ix- x^2/2!- ix^3/3!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot

Separating into real and imaginary parts,
e^{ix}= (1- x^2/2!+ x^4/4!- x^6/6!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot)+ i(x- x^3/3!+ x^5/5!+ \cdot\cdot\cdot)
e^{ix}= cos(x)+ i sin(x)

Now, take = \pi so that cos(x)= cos(\pi)= -1 and sin(x)= sin(\pi)= 0 and that becomes
e^{i\pi}= -1
or
e^{i\pi}+ 1= 0

I hope that is what you are looking for. Otherwise, what you are asking is uncomfortably close to "number mysticism".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top