Is there a typo in the formula for dividing complex numbers?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a potential typo in the formula for dividing complex numbers as presented in different editions of textbooks. Participants are examining the accuracy of the formula and sharing their experiences with various editions of the texts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the formula presented in their book, suggesting that it should state ##|\frac{z_1}{z_2}|=\frac{|z_1|}{|z_2|}## instead of repeating the same expression.
  • Another participant confirms the existence of a typo in the Schaum's Outline on Complex Numbers and mentions that it can be proven using Euler's notation.
  • A different participant, also referencing Kreyszig's Advanced Engineering Mathematics, agrees that there is a typo but notes that their edition does not contain this error.
  • One participant shares their experience with an online version of a textbook that differs from the physical edition, indicating that the chapter on complex numbers is missing in the physical book.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there is a typo in some editions of the textbooks, but there is disagreement regarding which editions contain the error, as some participants report that their editions do not have the typo.

Contextual Notes

There are references to different editions of textbooks, which may have varying content. The discussion highlights the potential for discrepancies between physical and online versions of the same textbook.

Drakkith
Mentor
Messages
23,205
Reaction score
7,687
Quick question. While going over complex numbers in my book, I think I came across a typo and I wanted to be sure I had the right information. In the paragraph going over dividing complex numbers, my book has:
##|\frac{z_1}{z_2}|=|\frac{z_1}{z_2}|##

That's obviously true. Should that be ##|\frac{z_1}{z_2}|=\frac{|z_1|}{|z_2|}## instead?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're reading the Schaum's Outline on Complex Numbers! I saw that too!

Yes that is a typo!

Its easy to prove using Euler's notation for complex numbers: ##z = r e^{i \theta}##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith
jedishrfu said:
You're reading the Schaum's Outline on Complex Numbers! I saw that too!

Actually I'm reading Kreyszig, Advanced Engineering Mathematics, 10th Edition.

jedishrfu said:
Yes that is a typo!

Its easy to prove using Euler's notation for complex numbers: ##z = r e^{i \theta}##

Thanks, Jedi!
 
Drakkith said:
Actually I'm reading Kreyszig, Advanced Engineering Mathematics, 10th Edition.
I have the 3rd edition of this book, which doesn't have this typo.
You might find it interesting that I paid $14.95 for the book, but that was in 1972...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
Mark44 said:
I have the 3rd edition of this book, which doesn't have this typo.
You might find it interesting that I paid $14.95 for the book, but that was in 1972...

I'm using an online version that came packaged with a code for the program we use for receiving and submitting our homework. Apparently the physical textbook that also came with the package either isn't the same textbook, or it's an edited/shortened version, as it doesn't even have the chapter on complex numbers in it. The physical book has chapters 1-8 that appear to follow the online version, but complex numbers are in chapter 13 in the online book, which is where the error is at. Had I known that I was getting shafted I would have purchased the code and the full book separately from each other.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K