Disproving Euler's Identity: Check My Math

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Onyxus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Euler
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around an attempt to disprove Euler's Identity, specifically the equation \( e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0 \). Participants are reviewing the mathematical steps taken by the original poster and providing feedback on the handling of complex logarithms and related concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster presents a series of mathematical steps that they believe disprove Euler's Identity, culminating in the claim that \( 2 = 0 \).
  • One participant questions the definition of the logarithm used in the calculations, suggesting that the treatment of logarithms in the complex domain is crucial.
  • Another participant notes that the logarithm of 1 is multivalued, expressed as \( \ln(1) = 2k\pi i \), where \( k \) is any integer, indicating a potential misunderstanding in the original poster's approach.
  • A later reply critiques the original poster's reasoning and suggests that their understanding of complex logarithms may be flawed.
  • The original poster acknowledges their lack of knowledge in complex numbers and expresses uncertainty about their error.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there are errors in the original poster's mathematical reasoning, particularly regarding the treatment of complex logarithms. However, there is no consensus on the specifics of the errors or how to correct them, as the discussion remains exploratory.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the original poster's understanding of complex analysis, particularly the properties of logarithmic functions in the complex plane, which are not fully addressed in their calculations.

Onyxus
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I was messing around with Euler’s Identity and I think I accidently disproved it. I would like someone to check my math to make sure I didn’t make any rookie mistakes.

<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0 \\ <br /> e^{\pi i} = - 1 \\ <br /> \left( {e^{\pi i} } \right)^2 = \left( { - 1} \right)^2 \\ <br /> e^{2\pi i} = 1 \\ <br /> \ln \left( {e^{2\pi i} } \right) = \ln \left( 1 \right) \\ <br /> 2\pi i = 0 \\ <br /> \frac{{2\pi i}}{{\pi i}} = \frac{0}{{\pi i}} \\ <br /> 2 = 0 \\ <br /> \end{array}<br />
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, how did you define the logarithm on complex numbers??
 
ln(1) = 2kπi, where k is any integer. ln is a multivalued function.
 
Onyxus said:
I was messing around with Euler’s Identity and I think I accidently disproved it. I would like someone to check my math to make sure I didn’t make any rookie mistakes.

<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0 \\ <br /> e^{\pi i} = - 1 \\ <br /> \left( {e^{\pi i} } \right)^2 = \left( { - 1} \right)^2 \\ <br /> e^{2\pi i} = 1 \\ <br /> \ln \left( {e^{2\pi i} } \right) = \ln \left( 1 \right) \\ <br /> 2\pi i = 0 \\ <br /> \frac{{2\pi i}}{{\pi i}} = \frac{0}{{\pi i}} \\ <br /> 2 = 0 \\ <br /> \end{array}<br />



What gives you away as a rookie is the title of your post, not your mathematics...which are also wrong.

Perhaps you'll be interested in reading about the complex logarithmic function's definition...

DonAntonio
 
edit: student posted under my account
 
Thank you, DonAntonio, mathman and micromass, I thought that was what my error was, but I wasn't sure. You see, I haven't yet taken a course in which I learn even the basics of complex numbers, so my knowledge in that area is rather lacking.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K