Modulus of the difference of two complex numbers

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equation |z^3 - z^{-3}| = 2sin(3θ) using geometric methods, specifically for z = cis(θ) where 0 < θ < π/6. Participants clarify that z^3 and z^{-3} can be expressed in terms of their trigonometric forms, leading to the conclusion that the difference can be represented geometrically. One user successfully demonstrates the proof by constructing a rhombus and using right triangles to find the necessary lengths. The importance of understanding the modulus in complex numbers is emphasized, as the factor of i does not affect the modulus calculation. The conversation highlights the relationship between complex numbers and geometric interpretations in the Argand plane.
Fourthkind
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,
I've been trying to help a friend with something that I learned in class but I'm now finding it hard to solve myself. The problem goes as follows:

Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

For z=cisθ, 0<θ<∏/6

Now, I chose ∏/12 as my angle and plotted all this on an Argand diagram, but I don't know how to prove that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ in such general form. I know that it is right, but I don't know how to get there. Right now I have a isosceles triangle with two lengths known and two angles known (both 3θ). I know the triangle is right-angled but I don't know if I can use this information since that is specific to my chosen angle, right?

I've spent quite some time on it and I'd really like to understand it. So far I've got xsin3θ=1 where x = |z3-z-3|.

Please help!
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Fourthkind said:
Hi guys,
I've been trying to help a friend with something that I learned in class but I'm now finding it hard to solve myself. The problem goes as follows:

Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

For z=cisθ, 0<θ<∏/6 if z= cis(\theta) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta)[/tex]
<br /> Do you understand what &quot;cis&quot; means? This takes about one line from that. You don&#039;t need to do anything at all with &quot;Argand diagrams&quot;. If z= cis(θ) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta) so that z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta). Write that out in terms of the <b>definition</b> of &quot;ciz&quot;.<br /> <br /> <blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-content"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent "> Now, I chose ∏/12 as my angle and plotted all this on an Argand diagram, but I don&#039;t know how to prove that |z<sup>3</sup>-z<sup>-3</sup>| = 2sin3θ in such general form. I know that it is right, but I don&#039;t know how to get there. Right now I have a isosceles triangle with two lengths known and two angles known (both 3θ). I know the triangle is right-angled but I don&#039;t know if I can use this information since that is specific to my chosen angle, right?<br /> <br /> I&#039;ve spent quite some time on it and I&#039;d really like to understand it. So far I&#039;ve got xsin3θ=1 where x = |z<sup>3</sup>-z<sup>-3</sup>|.<br /> <br /> Please help! </div> </div> </blockquote>
 
HallsofIvy said:
Do you understand what "cis" means? This takes about one line from that. You don't need to do anything at all with "Argand diagrams". If z= cis(θ) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta) so that z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta). Write that out in terms of the definition of "ciz".

Could you explain this a little more?

I managed to solve it by drawing a rhombus with |z^3- z^{-3}|being the vertical length along the imaginary axis from the origin to the point z^3- z^{-3} (by definition) then drawing a perpendicular bisector (that is, parallel to the real axis) which created four right-angled triangles with their 90° angles joined to the midpoint between the origin and point z^3- z^{-3}. Using one of these triangles, I determined the length of OM was sin3θ and therefore O to z^3- z^{-3} was twice that since M is the midpoint. I solved it like this since the problem stated it needed to be solved using geometry specifically.

I'll attach a picture to show you what I mean. It doesn't show in it but, line OA is equal in length to z^{3}
 

Attachments

  • IMAG0217.jpg
    IMAG0217.jpg
    20.7 KB · Views: 496
You didn't say "the problem stated it needed to be solved using geometry specifically"!

My idea was z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ sin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)= 2sin(3\theta).
 
Fourthkind said:
Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

So I assumed I had to do it in a way similar to the way I did.

HallsofIvy said:
My idea was z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ sin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)= 2sin(3\theta).

This is probably stupid but when I do it that way, I end up with 2isin3θ since:
z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ isin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)= 2isin(3\theta)

My class just recently started our complex number topic and so my knowledge of cis is extremely basic. Should I not be writing z^3 as cos3θ+isin3θ.

Thanks for your input.
 
Fourthkind said:
This is probably stupid but when I do it that way, I end up with 2isin3θ since:
z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ isin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)= 2isin(3\theta)

The question is asking for the modulus so a factor of i does not change the answer.

Edit: You asked for a geometric reason, so plot any z with the given constraint. z^3 will have the same magnitude (1) and will make an angle 3θ with the real axis if z makes and angle θ. z^-3 will just be the reflection of z^3 about the real axis. The length |z^3-z^-3| is just the length of the line connecting these two points so sin(3θ) will be half of this.
 
Last edited:
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Back
Top