Is 2 pi i equal to 0, contradicting the fact that pi and i cannot equal 0?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nicktacik
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the expression e^{2 pi i} equating to 1 and its implications for the logarithm function in the complex plane. It highlights that while ln(e^{2 pi i}) equals 0, this does not mean that 2 pi i is equal to 0, as the logarithm of complex numbers is defined up to multiples of 2 pi. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the complex logarithm, which differs from its real counterpart. It also points out a common misconception regarding the equality of logarithmic and exponential functions in complex analysis. Ultimately, the discussion clarifies that the equality does not imply that pi or i equals zero.
nicktacik
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
This one has me stumped.

e^{\pi i} = -1
e^{2 \pi i} = (-1) ^ 2 = 1
ln(e^{2 \pi i}) = ln(1) = 0
2 \pi i = 0

Or is 2 pi i actually 0, and this does not actually imply that either pi = 0 or i = 0?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Since 2 \pi i is an imaginary number you must use the definition of LN in the complex plane. You are using the definition for the real number line.

in the complex plane we have:

logz = log(r) + i \theta

edit (changed my definition of z)
r = |z|
and
\theta = arg(z)
 
Last edited:
More than that - logs of complex numbers are only defined up to multiples of 2pi. One can ought to take the principal branch - this is just a slightly more complicated variation on the square root 'fallacies'.
 
The mistake is here:
\ln e^z = z
This is not true for complex numbers.

Note: the other way around:
\exp (\ln z) = z, \ z\not =0
Is true.
 
Ok thanks. As you can see, I haven't taken my complex variables class yet.
 
its sort of like saying, (2^2 =4 and (-2)^2 = 4 so 2 = -2.)
 
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...
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...
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...
Back
Top