Is it possible to evaluate x^(2/3) for x<0?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nietzsche
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of the expression x^(2/3) for negative values of x, particularly focusing on the case of (-1)^(2/3). Participants explore the implications of using calculators, the conventions of algebra, and the complexities of fractional exponents in both real and complex number systems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion regarding the evaluation of (-1)^(2/3), noting that calculators return "undefined" for this expression.
  • Others argue that using complex variables allows for multiple solutions to (-1)^(2/3), specifically mentioning the use of Euler's formula.
  • One participant mentions that their TI-89 calculator consistently returns 1 for (-1)^(2/3), suggesting that the calculator's handling of negative bases may differ from other devices.
  • Another participant points out that the conventional approach in their education was to consider the square root of a square as its absolute value, which may explain discrepancies in calculator outputs.
  • A participant highlights that computing devices often restrict fractional powers of negative bases to nonnegative real numbers, which could lead to undefined results in certain contexts.
  • It is noted that the expression x^(m/n) can be defined for all real numbers if n is odd, which could apply to the case of (-1)^(2/3).
  • One participant suggests using logarithmic identities to explore all possible values of x^y when x is expressed in polar form.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the evaluation of (-1)^(2/3). There are multiple competing views regarding the treatment of negative bases in fractional exponents, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on calculator algorithms, the conventions of algebra taught in different educational contexts, and the distinction between real and complex number evaluations of fractional powers.

nietzsche
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
I am very confused. Here I was thinking I know the basics of algebra, and then I get two questions in my homework today with exponents like this.

[tex](-1)^{\frac{2}{3}} = undefined[/tex]

when I type it into my calculator.

But with manipulation,

[tex](-1)^{2/3} = [(-1)^{2}]^{\frac{1}{3}} = 1[/tex]

Am I missing something here? My textbook solutions manual says that you can graph such a function for negative values, but when I plug it into, for example, my Mac's graphing software, it only graphs it for positive values of x.

Which one is correct?

Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I can't speak for the calculators. However the solution can be obtained using complex variables:
-1=e[pi]i.
We the have 3 possible answers for (-1)2/3:
e2(n+1)[pi]i/3, where n=0,1,2.
 
My TI-89 gives an answer of 1 no matter how I use the parenthesis.

(-1)2/3 = 1
((-1)1/3)2 = 1
((-1)2)1/3 = 1

Which should make sense since:
- It is possible to square a negative and then take the cube root of the resulting number.
- It is possible to find the cube root of a negative number and square the resulting number.
 
pbandjay said:
My TI-89 gives an answer of 1 no matter how I use the parenthesis.

(-1)2/3 = 1
((-1)1/3)2 = 1
((-1)2)1/3 = 1

Which should make sense since:
- It is possible to square a negative and then take the cube root of the resulting number.
- It is possible to find the cube root of a negative number and square the resulting number.

Thank you, I guess I should buy a new calculator.
 
(Details of previous comment)

3 solurions: 1, (-1+(-3)1/2)/2, (-1-(-3)1/2)/2
 
When I went to school it was considered conventional to consider, the square root of a square as its absolute value and hence positive. Of course, this is only a convention; but calculators may be constructed to honor this convention.
 
Last edited:
I believe what is happening is a restriction of the computing device. Power functions with fractional powers are frequently restricted to nonnegative real numbers (Maple for example).

But the fractional power identity

[tex]x^{m/n}=\sqrt[n]{x^m}={(\sqrt[n]{x})}^m[/tex]

holds provided that the radicals on the right are defined.

However this assumes m and n are in lowest terms.

For example:

[tex](-1)^{2/3}={(\sqrt[3]{-1})^2=(-1)^2=1[/tex]

but

[tex](-1)^{4/6}={(\sqrt[6]{-1})^4=\text{ undefined}[/tex]

This may be part of why calculating devices shy away from fractional powers of negative bases.

The extension of roots to complex values is usually only done if the inputs are also complex. This subtely changes the meaning of some radicals.

[tex]\sqrt[3]{-8}=-2[/tex] in the real number sense.

[tex]\sqrt[3]{-8}=1+i\sqrt{3}[/tex] in the complex number sense.

In general, provided m and n are in lowest terms and n is odd, the expression [itex]x^{m/n}[/itex] is defined for all real numbers and can be graphed.

--Elucidus
 
Use x^y = e^(y.log(x)). If x=r.e^(i.t) then log(x)=log(r)+i.(t+2.pi.k) where k is any integer. This will give you all possible values of x^y.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K