Is {(-2)^5}^(1/5) a complex number ?

phydis
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Notice how the alpha page says
Assuming the principal root | Use the real‐valued root instead
If you select the real valued option you'll get -2.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
You have a typo
E = {(-2)^5}^(1/5)=(-32)^(1/5)
There are five numbers such that x^5=-32
(-32)^(1/5) should be one of them
they are
1.61803398874989+1.17557050458495 i
-0.61803398874989+1.90211303259031 i
-2
-0.61803398874989-1.90211303259031 i
1.61803398874989-1.17557050458495 i

We chose 1.61803398874989+1.17557050458495 i as it is first on the list and the most reasonable choice. Some people inexplicably pick -2.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
There are *five* solutions to x5=(-2)5. One of them is the real number -2. The other four are complex numbers. Wolfram Alpha gives you the principal root by default. You can force it to yield the real-valued root by clicking on "Use the real‐valued root instead".

You can see all five solutions if you instead ask WA to solve x5=(-2)5.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
got it. Thanks everyone!
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top