How Can De Moivre's Formula Help Find the Real Part of z=ii?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the real part of the complex number z=ii using De Moivre's formula and related exponential forms. Participants explore various approaches to simplify the expression and understand the implications of logarithmic identities in complex analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss rewriting the expression in exponential form and applying De Moivre's formula. There are attempts to derive the real part through different interpretations of logarithmic identities, particularly concerning ln(i).

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on using exponential forms and have confirmed certain steps, while others express confusion regarding specific logarithmic results. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, and there is an ongoing exchange of ideas without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of using tools like Wolfram Alpha for verification, and some participants express difficulty in understanding the derivation of ln(i) = i(π/2). The discussion reflects a mix of understanding and uncertainty regarding the application of complex logarithms.

zenite
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
1. Find the real part of z=ii by using De Moivre's formula.



Homework Equations


z= r(cos[tex]\theta[/tex] + i sin[tex]\theta[/tex])
zn= rn(cos(n[tex]\theta[/tex]) + i sin(n[tex]\theta[/tex]))


I tried using n=i to solve and got the ans 1i, but somehow feel that its not that simple. And the resultant argument I got from this approach is i[tex]\theta[/tex] which doesn't make sense. Tried using natural log, but didn't work out too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start by rewriting in exponential form and then use:

(eix)n = einx

That should do the trick :wink:
 
z = ii = ei(lni)
so n=lni and the real part is cos(lni). is this correct?
 
I'm not sure where your ln(i) comes from but that part is correct since ln(i) = [tex]i\pi/2[/tex]. However it can be simplified further.

I would have just written:
[tex]i^{i} = (e^{i\pi/2})^{i} = e^{i i\pi/2} = e^{- \pi/2}[/tex] and that's your answer since this is a real number already. (Wolfram Alpha confirms it)
 
thanks a lot. I couldn't get the part where lni = i(PI)/2, tried googling but couldn't find anything. but I could understand your working, you make it look so simple.

I used the formula, elny = y for my working, that's where the ln comes from. but yours is much more simplified.
 
zenite said:
I couldn't get the part where lni = i(PI)/2

Well, actually I just used Wolfram Alpha to find that, but if we combine our formulas, we have just proved it's true.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K