Simple complex power: why is e^( i (2*Pi*n*t)/T ) not 1?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the complex form of the Fourier series, specifically the term e^(i(2πnt)/T) and its behavior. It highlights that while e^(i(2πn)) equals 1 for integer n, the expression's dependence on t complicates the assumption that the entire series simplifies to f(t) = Σc. The conversation emphasizes that in complex numbers, 1 raised to a fractional power does not necessarily equal 1, which is crucial for understanding the Fourier series' behavior. Examples illustrate that the identity e^(a*b) ≠ (e^a)^b holds in complex contexts, leading to unexpected results. Ultimately, the discussion clarifies the importance of considering the phase and nature of complex numbers in such mathematical expressions.
Aziza
Messages
189
Reaction score
1
the complex form of Fourier series is:

f(t) = Ʃ c*e^[iωnt]
where c are the coefficients, the sum is from n= -inf to +inf; ω= 2*pi/T, where T is period...

but if you just look at e^[iωnt] = e^[ i (2*pi*n*t)/T] = {e^[ i (2*pi*n)] }^(t/T)

where I just took out the t/T...
well, e^[ i (2*pi*n)] = 1, since n is integer...and (1)^(t/T) is still equal to 1...so shouldn't the complex Fourier form just reduce to f(t) = Ʃ c ?

I feel i must be doing something stupid, if someone could just please point out what exactly...
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Every complex number, except 0, but including 1, has n distinct nth roots.
When dealing with complex numbers, 1 to a fractional power is not just 1.
 
In general, e^(a*b) != (e^a)^b with complex numbers a,b - unless you care about the phase of the expression in some other way.
 
HallsofIvy said:
When dealing with complex numbers, 1 to a fractional power is not just 1.

Nice one!
I'm just realizing that ##1^\pi## is the complex unit circle! :)
 
Hello Aziza,
In case you're still skeptical, here's a couple of examples. If you had something like:

eiπ/3 = (e)1/3 = (ei/3) = 1/2+sqrt(3)/2.

Then the identity applies, but take a look here:

(e2πi)i = 1i =/= e-2π = e2∏ii

The identity does not hold, and you can't really guess when and where it does, or doesn't.
In your case, you know it doesn't work because you get such an odd result, 0 for all t,and 00 for t=0, when we know for a fact that eiωnt are n rotating vectors in the complex plain!
 
Last edited:
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