Does |A| = k When a is a Complex Number and k is a Positive Integer?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the set A, defined as the kth roots of unity for a complex number a, has a cardinality of k when k is a positive integer. It is established that if a^k = 1, there are indeed k distinct kth roots of unity, assuming k is the smallest integer satisfying this condition. The conversation also touches on the nature of cyclic groups, noting that a group is cyclic if its order is finite and prime, which relates to the existence of isomorphisms to the kth roots of unity. Additionally, the discussion clarifies that while every non-zero real number has k complex kth roots, the roots vary based on whether the number is positive or negative. Overall, the conclusion supports that |A| equals k under the specified conditions.
jcsd
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
13
if
a^k =1
and
a \in \mathbb{C}
k \in Z^+
and for some k
A = \{a|a^k = 1\}
does
|A| = k
?

edited: becasue the real numbers are a subset of the complex numbers
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I googled the roots of unity and it appears that there are k kth roots of unity:


http://www.jimloy.com/algebra/roots.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If k is the smallest such integer greater than 1 such that the statement is true, then yes. We can find a cyclic group isomorphic to the kth roots of unity, which takes a lot of typing, but I can provide if you want it.
 
And you posted while I was typing. Oops.
 
Does this hold true for any ak = x?
 
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, so I apologise if I don't answer the question. Not every x is a root of unity. For example, the element 2 is of infinite order in C. So therefore we cannot find a k (not equal to 0) in the integers such that 2k = 1.
The group must be of finite order to be cyclic. But even this is not enough to guarantee that the group is cyclic. However, if the order of the group is prime, the group is cyclic. This is a consequence of Lagrange's theorem.
The fuss I am making about cyclic groups is because of the guaranteed existence of group isomorphisms to the kth roots of unity.
 
Last edited:
What I mean are there k kth roots of x, where x is a real number?
 
Yes, assuming that the number is not zero, there a k complex kth roots of a number. (I think this result is due to Descartes.)

If you restrict yourself to the postive reals, then there are two roots if k is even, and one if k is odd.

For the negative reals, there is one root on even powers, and no roots on odd powers.

Here's an explanation.

You're probably familiar with complex numbers written as
x+iy
with x and y real but you should be able to see that they can also be written as
r * (cos \theta + i sin \theta)
where
r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}
and
\theta=tan^{-1}\frac{x}{y}.

if you apply Euler's forumula, you get that
r * (cos \theta + i sin \theta)
is equivalent to
r * e^{i\theta}

Now, let's say we have two complex numbers:
z_1=r_1 * e^{i\theta_1}
and
z_2=r_2 * e^{i\theta_2}
then
z_1*z_2=r_1*r_2 * e^{i(\theta_1+\theta_2)}
and
z^n=r^n*e^{in\theta}

Now, let's look at your question, given k, and a, how many distinct z are there such that
z^k={r_z}^k*e^{ik\theta_z}=a=r_a*e^{\theta_a}
I'm not going to get into the proof that there is only one solution for r_z, or that it exists, here.

Now, since e^{i\theta}=e^{i(\theta+2n\pi)}
there are k solutions for \theta_z that correspond to the solutions to
\theta_z*k=\theta_a+2\pi*n
where n ranges over the integers from zero to k-1.
 
Back
Top