Proving De Moivre's Theorem for Negative Numbers?

In summary, the conversation discusses using De Moivre's Theorem to prove that for any integer n>0, the formula z^n= r^n\cis(n\theta) holds. The individual struggles with using this theorem for negative numbers and is seeking help. The conversation concludes with the suggestion to transform the formula with a negative n into a formula with the positive -n, using the previously proven relation between 1/cis(theta) and cis(-theta).
  • #1
NatFex
26
3
Or basically anything that isn't a positive integer.

So I can prove quite easily by induction that for any integer n>0, De Moivre's Theorem (below) holds.

If ##\DeclareMathOperator\cis{cis} z = r\cis\theta, z^n= r^n\cis(n\theta)##

My proof below:

Let P(n) be the statement ##z^n = r^n\cis(n\theta)##

Prove true for n = 1:
##z^1 = z = r\cis\theta = r^1\cis(1\theta)##

Assume true for n = k:
##z^k = r^k\cis(k\theta)##

Prove true for n = k + 1:
##z^{k+1} = z^k \times z\\
= r^k\cis(k\theta) * r\cis\theta\\
= r^{k+1}\cis(k\theta)\cis\theta\\
= r^{k+1}(\cos(k\theta) + i\sin(k\theta))((\cos\theta + i\sin\theta)\\
= r^{k+1}(\cos(k\theta)\cos\theta + \cos(k\theta)i\sin\theta + i\sin(k\theta)\cos\theta - \sin(k\theta)\sin\theta)##
then by compound angle identities
##= r^{k+1}(\cos(k\theta + \theta) + i\sin(k\theta + \theta))\\
= r^{k+1}\cis((k+1)\theta)##

However I struggle to do this with negatives. I tried the simple case of

##\frac{1}{r\cis\theta}## and from there, try to get to ##\frac{1}{r}\cis(-\theta)##, but I've only managed to do that by replacing the numerator of 1 with ##r\cis0##, which is equivalent, and then from there using De Moivre's Theorem to get an argument of ##-\theta##, which is... not very useful considering De Moivre's Theorem is what I'm trying to prove in the first place.

I just can't manipulate it into a form that would allow me to use compound angle identities like I could with positive numbers. Any ideas?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You can use $$z^{-n} = (z^n)^{-1}$$
 
  • #3
What is the relation between ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}## and ##\cis (-\theta)##?
 
  • #4
Math_QED said:
You can use $$z^n = (z^n)^-1$$
Yeah, but I can't prove that that last step (raising the complex number to a power of -1) will make the angle/argument inside ##\cis## negative

Samy_A said:
What is the relation between ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}## and ##\cis (-\theta)##?

I know that ##\frac{1}{r\cis\theta} = (r\cis\theta)^{-1}##, but -1 is outside the boundaries for n that I have proved in my first post :(

I know it works, I would just like to prove it.
 
  • #5
What is $$1/z$$ equal to?
 
  • #6
NatFex said:
Yeah, but I can't prove that that last step (raising the complex number to a power of -1) will make the angle/argument inside ##\cis## negative
So what?
Where in your proof for positive ##n## did it matter whether the angle is positive or negative?
NatFex said:
I know that ##\frac{1}{r\cis\theta} = (r\cis\theta)^{-1}##, but -1 is outside the boundaries for n that I have proved in my first post :(
You didn't answer the question: what is the relation between ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}## and ##\cis (-\theta)##?
 
  • #7
Math_QED said:
What is $$1/z$$ equal to?
##z^{-1}##, but my proof in the OP only works for positive integers. I'm trying to use -1 as a base case to write a proof for negative numbers, but for some reason I cannot work out how to apply a similar strategy (expand then use compound identities)

Samy_A said:
So what?
Where in your proof for positive ##n## did it matter whether the angle is positive or negative?

It doesn't matter if θ is positive or negative, what matters is its multiplier, which is n.

Samy_A said:
You didn't answer the question: what is the relation between ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}## and ##\cis (-\theta)##?

Well... they are equal, but thus far my understanding of it is only intuitive, until I can prove it, which is what I'm asking for help with
 
  • #8
NatFex said:
##z^{-1}##, but my proof in the OP only works for positive integers. I'm trying to use -1 as a base case to write a proof for negative numbers, but for some reason I cannot work out how to apply a similar strategy (expand then use compound identities)
It doesn't matter if θ is positive or negative, what matters is its multiplier, which is n.
Well... they are equal, but thus far my understanding of it is only intuitive, until I can prove it, which is what I'm asking for help with
Ok, so if ##z=a+ib##, where ##a, b## are real, how would you compute ##\frac{1}{z}=\frac{1}{a+ib}##?
Hint: multiply numerator and denominator by ##a-ib##.

Once you have proven that ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}=\cis (-\theta)##, you can easily transform the formula with a negative ##n## into a formula with the positive ##-n##. And then you can use what you already have proven.
 
  • Like
Likes NatFex
  • #9
Samy_A said:
Ok, so if ##z=a+ib##, where ##a, b## are real, how would you compute ##\frac{1}{z}=\frac{1}{a+ib}##?
Hint: multiply numerator and denominator by ##a-ib##.

Once you have proven that ##\frac{1}{\cis \theta}=\cis (-\theta)##, you can easily transform the formula with a negative ##n## into a formula with the positive ##-n##. And then you can use what you already have proven.
Brilliant, just what I was looking for

I completely forgot about looking at the complex numbers in rectangular form instead, cheers!
 

1. How can De Moivre's Theorem be applied to negative numbers?

De Moivre's Theorem can be applied to negative numbers by converting them into complex numbers using the formula z = x + yi, where x is the real part and yi is the imaginary part. This allows us to use the theorem for complex numbers to prove it for negative numbers.

2. What is De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers?

De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers states that for any real number n and any complex number z = x + yi, the following formula holds: (cos(nθ) + isin(nθ))^n = cos(nθ) + isin(nθ).

3. Why is it important to prove De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers?

It is important to prove De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers because it allows us to apply the theorem to a wider range of mathematical problems. It also helps us understand the properties of complex numbers and their relationship with trigonometric functions.

4. What is the proof for De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers?

The proof for De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers involves using the binomial theorem and the properties of complex numbers. It can be shown that the formula (cos(nθ) + isin(nθ))^n = cos(nθ) + isin(nθ) holds true for all real numbers n and all complex numbers z = x + yi.

5. What are some applications of De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers?

De Moivre's Theorem for negative numbers has various applications in mathematics, physics, and engineering. For example, it can be used to simplify and solve problems involving complex numbers and trigonometric functions, as well as in the calculation of roots of complex numbers.

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
35
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
963
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
265
Replies
5
Views
895
Replies
4
Views
412
Back
Top