Getting from complex domain to real domain

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex numbers
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transition from complex expressions to real expressions, particularly focusing on the relationship between the forms Acosx and Ae^(jx) as described by Euler's formula. Participants explore the mathematical operations involved, the implications of taking the real part of complex numbers, and the foundational concepts in linear algebra and polynomial rings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses discomfort with the transition Acosx <==> Ae^(jx), questioning the legitimacy of taking the real part as a mathematical operation.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of linear independence of vectors in linear algebra, suggesting that this underpins the transition between the complex and real forms.
  • A different perspective is presented, viewing complex numbers as polynomials in a quotient ring, which provides an alternative framework for understanding their properties.
  • One participant argues that taking the real part of a complex number is a normal operation, comparing it to extracting the x-value from a point in two-dimensional space.
  • There is a mention of the historical context of these mathematical operations, indicating that while the method may have been invented, it has become standard in mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of taking the real part of complex numbers. While some argue it is a standard operation, others question its foundational legitimacy, indicating a lack of agreement on the underlying principles.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on definitions and the historical development of mathematical concepts, which may influence participants' understanding and acceptance of the operations discussed.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
Hi!

I am ok with understanding Euler's formula and how its proven. It is basic mathematic operations that are made possible by the characteristics of i, cos, sin, and exp.

What still makes me uncomfortable is the jump we make at the very beginning or end of calculations, basically Acosx <==> Ae^(jx). The explanations are usually the "real" part of the exponential, and Euler's formula is used to help with this.

But for my complete understanding, taking the real part of something just ins't a "normal" mathematical operation if that makes sense (it is invented for dealing with complex numbers). Is there any other explaination for the transistion we make Acosx <==> Ae^(jx) and why we can do that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jaydnul said:
Hi!

I am ok with understanding Euler's formula and how its proven. It is basic mathematic operations that are made possible by the characteristics of i, cos, sin, and exp.

What still makes me uncomfortable is the jump we make at the very beginning or end of calculations, basically Acosx <==> Ae^(jx). The explanations are usually the "real" part of the exponential, and Euler's formula is used to help with this.

But for my complete understanding, taking the real part of something just ins't a "normal" mathematical operation if that makes sense (it is invented for dealing with complex numbers). Is there any other explaination for the transistion we make Acosx <==> Ae^(jx) and why we can do that?
It is linear algebra. The vectors ##\vec{1}## and ##\vec{\mathrm{i}}## are linear independent over the real numbers. That means that any real expression
$$
\alpha \vec{1} + \beta \vec{\mathrm{i}} = \alpha' \vec{1} +\beta' \vec{\mathrm{i}}
$$
implies
$$
(\alpha-\alpha')\cdot \vec{1} + (\beta-\beta')\cdot \vec{\mathrm{i}}=\vec{0}
$$
and therefore ##\alpha=\alpha' ## and ##\beta=\beta'## by linear independence.
 
Another picture of looking at the complex numbers is ##\mathbb{C}=\mathbb{R}[T]/\langle T^2-1 \rangle## which is a quotient ring of the polynomials over the real numbers in one variable ##T.## A complex number is thus a polynomial ##\alpha+\beta\cdot \vec{\mathrm{i}} =\alpha +\beta \cdot T## where we identify ##T^2## with ##-1.## Since ##0 \neq T \neq 1,## we can conclude from ##\alpha+\beta\cdot \vec{\mathrm{i}}=\alpha+\beta\cdot T=0## that ##\alpha = \beta=0.##
 
jaydnul said:
Hi!

I am ok with understanding Euler's formula and how its proven. It is basic mathematic operations that are made possible by the characteristics of i, cos, sin, and exp.
Good. That is the hard part.
jaydnul said:
What still makes me uncomfortable is the jump we make at the very beginning or end of calculations, basically Acosx <==> Ae^(jx). The explanations are usually the "real" part of the exponential, and Euler's formula is used to help with this.

But for my complete understanding, taking the real part of something just ins't a "normal" mathematical operation if that makes sense (it is invented for dealing with complex numbers).
It is very normal. If you have a point in two dimensional space, ##(x,y) \in \mathbb{R}## X ##\mathbb{R}## ,it is completely normal to look at its ##x## value. So looking at the real part of ##Ae^{(jx)} = (A\cos(x), A\sin(x))## is normal.
(The question of how and why it was invented is a historical question. It is now standard mathematics, which is all that matters for this discussion.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K