Troubleshooting: What's Wrong Here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anzas
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical properties and definitions of roots, particularly focusing on the fourth root of negative and positive numbers, and the implications of complex numbers in these contexts. Participants explore the definitions, conventions, and potential paradoxes arising from these mathematical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that (-4)^{\frac{2}{4}} does not equal \sqrt[4]{(-4)^2}, emphasizing that both sides represent principal values.
  • Others suggest that without considering complex analysis, there is no definition for \sqrt{-4}, which leads to meaningless conclusions in the discussion.
  • Several participants assert that the fourth root of 16 should be plus or minus two, discussing the implications of defining the base of exponentiation and the potential for multiple values based on conventions.
  • One participant proposes an alternative approach to calculating the fourth root of 16, leading to multiple possible values including complex roots.
  • A participant presents a paradox involving the square root of negative numbers, questioning the validity of certain assumptions made in the discussion.
  • Another participant challenges the ordering of complex numbers, questioning the use of inequalities with complex quantities.
  • It is noted that while real numbers allow for a specific identification of roots, complex numbers do not form an ordered field, complicating the identification of roots in that context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the definitions and implications of roots, particularly in relation to complex numbers. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in definitions and assumptions regarding square and fourth roots, particularly when extending to complex numbers. The discussion reflects various interpretations and conventions that are not universally accepted.

Anzas
Messages
87
Reaction score
0
39578883.jpg


whats wrong here?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
[tex](-4)^{\frac{2}{4}} \ne \sqrt[4]{(-4)^2}[/tex]

Because both the rhs and the lhs are specifically the principle values.
 
I think there is no definition of [tex]\sqrt{-4}[/tex] if complex analysis is not concerned right in the first place, so you have to stop right at that first place too, or your continuing process is then all meaningless, which is what the ugly guy in that picture is doing...:shy:
 
The fourth root of 16 should be plus or minus two. :smile:

If it weren't specifically defined that a had to be greater than 0 and not equal to one for [tex]f(x)=a^x[/tex] to be a valid function, you could have all kinds of possibilities:

[tex]-8^{\frac{1}{3}}[/tex] would be "75% chance of -2 and 25% chance of +2". A '1/3' exponent would give you -2, while a '2/6' exponent would give you plus or minus 2, etc.
 
BobG said:
The fourth root of 16 should be plus or minus two. :smile:

If it weren't specifically defined that a had to be greater than 0 and not equal to one for [tex]f(x)=a^x[/tex] to be a valid function, you could have all kinds of possibilities:

[tex]-8^{\frac{1}{3}}[/tex] would be "75% chance of -2 and 25% chance of +2". A '1/3' exponent would give you -2, while a '2/6' exponent would give you plus or minus 2, etc.

It depends on the convention, I guess.
 
BobG said:
The fourth root of 16 should be plus or minus two. :smile:

If it weren't specifically defined that a had to be greater than 0 and not equal to one for [tex]f(x)=a^x[/tex] to be a valid function, you could have all kinds of possibilities:

[tex]-8^{\frac{1}{3}}[/tex] would be "75% chance of -2 and 25% chance of +2". A '1/3' exponent would give you -2, while a '2/6' exponent would give you plus or minus 2, etc.

We had this one before f(x) = x^(n/p) is specifically the principle branch of the function as is the radical symbol.
 
Let's do it the other way then:

16^(1/4) = (16^(1/2))^(1/2) = (+-4)^(1/2) = 2 or -2 or 2i or -2i :biggrin:
 
<1> Let x=-4 < 0, then let y1=sqrt(x) > 0 and y2=sqrt(x) < 0 (sqrt definition)and suppose these are correct. This means y^2=x. Paradox! y^2 < 0
<2> Rewrite the proof induction in the picture in this vars (x,y) form y=sqrt(x) = x^(2x(1/4))= (x^2)^(1/4)= ((-x)^2)^(1/4) = -x/2 (minus because x<0), this means y>0
If we suppose sqrt(negative) is allowed. From 2, y2 < 0 value is lost as Alkatran and many posts above indicated. But the truth is that sqrt(negative) isnot allowed, such assumption is impossible.
From1,2 say that picture gives a seemingly logical but incorrect induction :biggrin:
 
newPatrick, why are the complex numbers ordered? (in <1> you use < on complex quantities.)
 
  • #10
Here's the basic gist of what this guy did:

x = x
x^2 = x^2
sqr(x^2) = x or -x
x = -x

It's not a correct logic, or is NOT =
 
  • #11
16, like any number, has 4 fourth roots: 2, -2, 2i and -2i.

In the real numbers we can specifically identify THE square or fourth root as the POSITIVE root. The complex numbers do NOT form an ordered field so we cannot distinguish complex roots in that way.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
8K