Linear Algebra and Complex Numbers

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on representing complex numbers as 2x2 matrices in the context of linear algebra. Participants explore how to express the real and imaginary components of a complex number, ultimately identifying the 2x2 identity matrix for the real part and a rotation matrix for the imaginary part. The correct representation of a complex number z = x + iy is found to be the matrix [x -y; y x]. This approach effectively combines the real and imaginary parts into a single matrix form. The conversation highlights the collaborative problem-solving process in understanding complex analysis through linear algebra.
SNOOTCHIEBOOCHEE
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
1. Complex analysis is the study of number z= x+iy where i^2=-1. can you find a way to represent complex numbers as 2x2 matrices



i honestly have no clue where to start with this one. we are one week through my linear algebra course.

the only possible thing i can thing of is det (x -yi
1 1) but that seems really wrong
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay, how do we represent the number one in matrix form?
 
Google gave me some pretty fruitful results on this one.
 
the number 1 in matrix form is just [1]
 
No, we're talking about 2 by 2 matrices. 1 is the "multiplicative identity" for the real numbers. What is the multiplicative identity for 2 by 2 matrices?

Now think about i. Where would you put the 1's so multiplying the matrix by itself will give you the negative of the identity matrix?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
diagonol 1's i don't know how to use LAtex but its like [1 0;0 1] on MATLAB prolly the transpose of that for the second question your asking
 
I meant in 2x2 form. I'll start for you, we can write the real component as;

\Re = x\cdot\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1\end{array}\right]

In otherwords, the 2x2 identity matrix. Now, for the imaginary part we want a matrix which represent an anti-clockwise rotation by \pi/2 about the origin. Can you think of a matrix that does this?

EDIT: Halls strikes again.
 
[0 1
1 0] ??

i think that would do it
 
SNOOTCHIEBOOCHEE said:
[0 1
1 0] ??

i think that would do it
That's very close but not quite. Note that
\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0\end{array}\right]\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0\end{array}\right] = \left[ \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0& 1\end{array}\right] = I_2
You want;
\left[ \begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d\end{array}\right]\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d\end{array}\right] = -\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0& 1\end{array}\right]
 
  • #10
[0 -1
1 0]


ok got it i think
 
  • #11
SNOOTCHIEBOOCHEE said:
[0 -1
1 0]


ok got it i think
Looks good to me :approve: (Nice name by-the-way :wink:)
 
  • #12
so the answer would be
x [1 0;0 1] + y[0 -1; 1 0] ??


thans jay and silent bob are fantanstci
 
  • #13
Yep, your correct. However, you can represent it as a single matrix thus;

\left[ \begin{array}{cc} x & -y \\ y & x\end{array}\right]

Both forms are correct.
 
  • #14
You guys are absolute geniuses and i owe you my life. ty
 
  • #15
Okay, I'll send you my bill!
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K