Modulus of the difference of two complex numbers

Fourthkind
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,
I've been trying to help a friend with something that I learned in class but I'm now finding it hard to solve myself. The problem goes as follows:

Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

For z=cisθ, 0<θ<∏/6

Now, I chose ∏/12 as my angle and plotted all this on an Argand diagram, but I don't know how to prove that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ in such general form. I know that it is right, but I don't know how to get there. Right now I have a isosceles triangle with two lengths known and two angles known (both 3θ). I know the triangle is right-angled but I don't know if I can use this information since that is specific to my chosen angle, right?

I've spent quite some time on it and I'd really like to understand it. So far I've got xsin3θ=1 where x = |z3-z-3|.

Please help!
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Fourthkind said:
Hi guys,
I've been trying to help a friend with something that I learned in class but I'm now finding it hard to solve myself. The problem goes as follows:

Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

For z=cisθ, 0<θ<∏/6 if z= cis(\theta) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta)[/tex]
<br /> Do you understand what &quot;cis&quot; means? This takes about one line from that. You don&#039;t need to do anything at all with &quot;Argand diagrams&quot;. If z= cis(θ) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta) so that z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta). Write that out in terms of the <b>definition</b> of &quot;ciz&quot;.<br /> <br /> <blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-content"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent "> Now, I chose ∏/12 as my angle and plotted all this on an Argand diagram, but I don&#039;t know how to prove that |z<sup>3</sup>-z<sup>-3</sup>| = 2sin3θ in such general form. I know that it is right, but I don&#039;t know how to get there. Right now I have a isosceles triangle with two lengths known and two angles known (both 3θ). I know the triangle is right-angled but I don&#039;t know if I can use this information since that is specific to my chosen angle, right?<br /> <br /> I&#039;ve spent quite some time on it and I&#039;d really like to understand it. So far I&#039;ve got xsin3θ=1 where x = |z<sup>3</sup>-z<sup>-3</sup>|.<br /> <br /> Please help! </div> </div> </blockquote>
 
HallsofIvy said:
Do you understand what "cis" means? This takes about one line from that. You don't need to do anything at all with "Argand diagrams". If z= cis(θ) then z^3= cis(3\theta) and z^{-3}= cis(-3\theta) so that z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta). Write that out in terms of the definition of "ciz".

Could you explain this a little more?

I managed to solve it by drawing a rhombus with |z^3- z^{-3}|being the vertical length along the imaginary axis from the origin to the point z^3- z^{-3} (by definition) then drawing a perpendicular bisector (that is, parallel to the real axis) which created four right-angled triangles with their 90° angles joined to the midpoint between the origin and point z^3- z^{-3}. Using one of these triangles, I determined the length of OM was sin3θ and therefore O to z^3- z^{-3} was twice that since M is the midpoint. I solved it like this since the problem stated it needed to be solved using geometry specifically.

I'll attach a picture to show you what I mean. It doesn't show in it but, line OA is equal in length to z^{3}
 

Attachments

  • IMAG0217.jpg
    IMAG0217.jpg
    20.7 KB · Views: 494
You didn't say "the problem stated it needed to be solved using geometry specifically"!

My idea was z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ sin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)= 2sin(3\theta).
 
Fourthkind said:
Use geometry to show that |z3-z-3| = 2sin3θ

So I assumed I had to do it in a way similar to the way I did.

HallsofIvy said:
My idea was z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ sin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ sin(3\theta)= 2sin(3\theta).

This is probably stupid but when I do it that way, I end up with 2isin3θ since:
z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ isin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)= 2isin(3\theta)

My class just recently started our complex number topic and so my knowledge of cis is extremely basic. Should I not be writing z^3 as cos3θ+isin3θ.

Thanks for your input.
 
Fourthkind said:
This is probably stupid but when I do it that way, I end up with 2isin3θ since:
z^3- z^{-3}= cis(3\theta)- cis(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- (cos(-3\theta)+ isin(-3\theta)= cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)- cos(3\theta)+ isin(3\theta)= 2isin(3\theta)

The question is asking for the modulus so a factor of i does not change the answer.

Edit: You asked for a geometric reason, so plot any z with the given constraint. z^3 will have the same magnitude (1) and will make an angle 3θ with the real axis if z makes and angle θ. z^-3 will just be the reflection of z^3 about the real axis. The length |z^3-z^-3| is just the length of the line connecting these two points so sin(3θ) will be half of this.
 
Last edited:
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top