Euler Representation of complex numbers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Euler representation of complex numbers, particularly focusing on the mathematical meaning of expressions like e^{i\pi} and the application of Euler's formula in algebraic manipulations involving complex numbers. Participants explore the implications of using Euler's form in calculations and the confusion that arises from it.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the meaning of e^{i\pi} and how a constant like e can be raised to the imaginary unit i.
  • Another participant attempts to apply Euler's formula to a theorem about the absolute value of the sum of complex numbers but realizes a mistake in their approach.
  • Several participants discuss the correct application of absolute values in complex algebra, emphasizing the need to expand expressions correctly.
  • There is a question about how the angle θ_1 - θ_2 appears in the equation related to the absolute value of the sum of complex numbers.
  • A participant reflects on the representation of complex numbers in the complex plane and expresses confusion about the numerical value of expressions involving i.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of e^{i\pi} or the application of Euler's formula in their calculations. Multiple viewpoints and uncertainties remain regarding the mathematical properties of complex numbers and their representations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of complex algebra and the application of Euler's formula, particularly in relation to absolute values and the interpretation of complex numbers in the complex plane.

Hijaz Aslam
Messages
66
Reaction score
1
I am bit confused with the Eueler representation of Complex Numbers.

For instance, we say that e^{i\pi}=cos(\pi)+isin(\pi)=-1+i0=-1.
The derivation of e^{i\theta}=cos(\theta)+isin(\theta) is carried out using the Taylor series. I quite understand how ##e^{i\pi}## turns out to be ##-1## using taylor series. But what is the mathematical meaning of ##e^{i\pi}##? How can a constant (##e##) be raised to an 'entity' like ##i=\sqrt{-1}##?

This problem started to concern me when I tried the following out.
A theorem states that : |z_1+z_2|^2=|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2+2Re(z_1\bar{z_2})=|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2+2|z_1||z_2|cos(\theta_1-\theta_2)

But I tried solving this out using the Euler number like: |z_1+z_2|^2=|(z_1+z_2)^2|=|(r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2|= |r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+|2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}|=r_1+r_2+2r_1r_2=|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2+2|z_1||z_2|

I know that am seriously wrong somewhere. Can I follow out the "complex" algebra of 'complex numbers' by using Euler's form in simple algebra?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Alright, I think I've made a 'grand' mistake by stating: |(r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2|= |r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+|2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}|.

Of course |(r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2|= (r_1e^{i\theta_1})^2+(r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2+2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}|\neq|r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+|2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}|.

So, how do I get along using the Euler Form?
 
Hijaz Aslam said:
Alright, I think I've made a 'grand' mistake by stating: |(r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2|= |r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+|2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}|.
Indeed, your mistake is on the first line. Remember that ##Re(z)=|z|\cos\theta##. Then we have
|r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2=|r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+2r_1r_2\cos(\theta_1-\theta_2)
 
suremarc said:
Indeed, your mistake is on the first line. Remember that ##Re(z)=|z|\cos\theta##. Then we have
|r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2=|r_1e^{i\theta_1}|^2+|r_2e^{i\theta_2}|^2+2r_1r_2\cos(\theta_1-\theta_2)

Now I want to know how that angle ##\theta_1-\theta_2## crept into the equation? Can you elaborate?
 
Hijaz Aslam said:
Now I want to know how that angle ##\theta_1-\theta_2## crept into the equation? Can you elaborate?
Sorry, I was hasty in answering. I'll backtrack a bit.

Your mistake is in misapplying the absolute value. Recall that ##|z|=\sqrt{z\bar{z}}##, so that ##|z|^2=z\bar{z}##. This turns ##|z+w|^2## into the product ##(z+w)(\bar{z}+\bar{w})##, which can be expanded by distributivity.

As for your earlier question--imagine that ##e^{it}## is the position of a point mass, where the real and imaginary axes replace the x- and y-axes, respectively. Then compare the tangent vector with the complex derivative. What do you see?
 
Oh yes! Thanks a lot suremac. I've missed out that point. So, I presume there isn't much to do by taking
|(r_1e^{i\theta_1}+r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2|=|(r_1e^{i\theta_1})^2+(r_2e^{i\theta_2})^2+2r_1r_2e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2})| rather than getting confused.

Am afraid that I don't understand the question you have posed. We represent a complex number in a complex plane by a vector whose magnitude is ##|z|##. I understand that ##e^{i\theta}## a sort of function defined by : f(x)=e^{i\theta}=cos\theta+isin\theta and by plugging in the value ##\theta=\pi## yields an outcome of ##-1##, i.e ##f(\pi)=-1##. Just like we represent any other function.
But I am little confused with the "non-functional" value of ##e^{i\theta}## that is, the numerical value of ##2.17^{i\pi}## (like ##2^3=8##) etc. Am I confusing a property intrinsic to real numbers alone with a 'complex attribute'? I think I am indirectly questioning the 'concievable' numerical value of ##i##. Sorry if I am being irrational.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K