This shows that the parallelogram law holds for complex numbers.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the proof of the Parallelogram Law as it applies to complex numbers. Participants explore different methods of proving the law, including algebraic manipulations and vector methods, while addressing potential errors in calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a calculation involving complex numbers to prove the Parallelogram Law, questioning the validity of their approach.
  • Another participant suggests that the radicals in the original calculation should be squared or omitted, indicating a potential error in the first post.
  • A later reply acknowledges a typo in the initial calculation and thanks the participant who pointed it out.
  • Another participant introduces vector methods as an alternative approach to proving the law, detailing the algebraic steps involved in both vector and complex number notation.
  • This participant also explains how to express the magnitudes of complex numbers using their conjugates, leading to a similar conclusion about the Parallelogram Law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the initial calculation, with some pointing out potential errors while others provide alternative methods. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the validity of the original proof.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing assumptions and potential misinterpretations in the calculations presented. The discussion involves various mathematical representations and methods, which may lead to different conclusions depending on the approach taken.

Kahsi
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Hi :smile:

I just started to look at complex numbers.

Prove the ``Parallellogram law''
http://www.sosmath.com/complex/number/complexplane/img4.gif


This is how I solved it:

[tex]z=a+bi[/tex]
[tex]w=c+di[/tex]

[tex]|z+w|^2=\sqrt{(a+c)^2+(b+d)^2}=a^2+2ac+c^2+b^2+2bd+d^2[/tex]

then we have

[tex]|z-w|^2=\sqrt{(a-c)^2+(b-d)^2}=a^2-2ac+c^2+b^2-2bd+d^2[/tex]

[tex]2(|z|^2+|w|^2)=2((a^2+b^2)+(c^2+d^2)) = 2a^2+2b^2+2c^2+2d^2[/tex]

[tex]a^2+2ac+c^2+b^2+2bd+d^2+a^2-2ac+c^2+b^2-2bd+d^2=2a^2+2b^2+2c^2+2d^2[/tex]

My question is:

Was my calculation OK or was it a misscalculation (a lucky one which prooved the formula)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Those 2 radicals should be squared.Or should be absent altogether.

The rest is okay.

Daniel.
 
Oh...That was a typo :blushing:

Thank you dextercioby :cool:
 
vector methods are nice too. i.e. |z+w|^2 = (z+w).(z+w), (dot product),

and |z-w|^2 = (z-w).(z-w).

Expanding and adding, the cross terms cancel, leaving

z.z + w.w + z.z + w.w = 2(|z|^2 + |w|^2).



you can do this with complex numbers notation too, no vectors. i.e. let zbar be the conjugate of the complex number z. Then |z|^2 = z(zbar).

Hence |z+w|^2 = (z+w)([z+w]bar). But bar commutes with sums and products, so this equals

(z+w)(zbar + wbar) = z(zbar) + w(wbar) + wzbar + zwbar.

Similarly |z-w|^2 = z(zbar) + w(wbar) - wzbar - zwbar.

so the sum is 2 (z[zbar] + w[wbar]) = 2 (|z|^2 + |w|^2).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
777