Questions about imaginary number and root of 4

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties and comparisons of imaginary and complex numbers, specifically addressing questions about their magnitudes, ordering, and the definition of square roots. Participants explore theoretical aspects and implications of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether imaginary numbers can be compared to real numbers, suggesting that "i" cannot be greater than any real number.
  • There is a discussion about the ordering of complex numbers, with some asserting that no consistent ordering exists for complex numbers.
  • Participants raise questions about the definition of square roots, specifically why \sqrt{4} is defined as 2 and not -2, attributing this to conventions in mathematics.
  • One participant proposes that the product of two complex numbers results in another complex number, while also questioning the geometric interpretation of complex operations.
  • There is a discussion about the reciprocal of a complex number and its implications, with one participant expressing surprise at the formula for the reciprocal.
  • Some participants suggest that when comparing complex numbers, one should refer to their absolute values rather than attempting to compare them directly.
  • There is contention regarding the interpretation of statements about imaginary numbers, with some participants asserting that "i" is not a number in the conventional sense.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the comparison of imaginary and complex numbers, with no consensus on whether such comparisons can be made meaningfully. The definition of square roots and the nature of imaginary numbers also generate varied opinions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of a clear consensus on the ordering of complex numbers and the definitions used in discussing square roots and imaginary numbers. Some mathematical steps and definitions remain unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals exploring complex numbers, their properties, and the foundational definitions in mathematics, particularly in the context of imaginary numbers and their applications.

Shing
Messages
141
Reaction score
1
I am thinking that
if the imaginary number is bigger than the other number,
is it right to say that:
i> 5 ?
7i> 3i ?
Does i has magnitude?

if
[tex]Z_1=4+5i[/tex]
then
[tex]Z_2=1-3i[/tex]
whether [tex]Z_1>Z_2 or Z_2>Z_1[/tex] is true?

If we say [tex]Z_a[/tex] is bigger than [tex]Z_b[/tex], does that means the absolute value of these complex number?

Thank you :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Also
I have been wonder why [tex]\sqrt{4} =2[/tex]
but why NOT -2, negative two?
 
Shing said:
I am thinking that
if the imaginary number is bigger than the other number,
is it right to say that:
i> 5 ?
7i> 3i ?
Does i has magnitude?

if
[tex]Z_1=4+5i[/tex]
then
[tex]Z_2=1-3i[/tex]
whether [tex]Z_1>Z_2 or Z_2>Z_1[/tex] is true?

If we say Z_a is bigger than Z_b, does that means the absooluate value of these complex number?

Thank you :)
No, "i" is not bigger than any real number.
As it happens, when we talk about complex and imaginary numbers, we cannot have an ordering relation between them.
Numerous complex numbers will have the same magnitude, so that a number's magnitude cannot serve as an identificatory trait of that number.
 
Shing said:
Also
I have been wonder why [tex]\sqrt{4} =2[/tex]
but why NOT -2, negative two?
Good question!

Answer:
Because we have, by convenience, DEFINED the square root thusly.

Similarly, by convenience, we have defined 1 not to be a prime number.
 
Shing said:
I am thinking that
if the imaginary number is bigger than the other number,
is it right to say that:
i> 5 ?
7i> 3i ?
Does i has magnitude?
It is not possible to assign an "order" to the complex numbers in such a way as to have an "ordered field" (that is, so that if a< b and 0< c, then ac< bc and if a< b, then a+c< b+ c (for any c)). For example, if we were to define an order so that 0< i, then we must have 0*i< i*i or 0< -1. Since this is not necessarily "regular order" that is not a contradiction itself but multiplying by i again, 0*i< -1*i or 0< -i. Adding i to both sides, we must have 0+i< -i+ i or i< 0, contradicting 0< i. But if we try to define an order so that i< 0, we can, in the same way, show that 0< i getting the same contradiction.

if
[tex]Z_1=4+5i[/tex]
then
[tex]Z_2=1-3i[/tex]
whether [tex]Z_1>Z_2 or Z_2>Z_1[/tex] is true?
Neither is true- as I just showed there is no way to compare complex numbers.

If we say [tex]Z_a[/tex] is bigger than [tex]Z_b[/tex], does that means the absolute value of these complex number?
I've never seen anyone say that Za> Zb for Za and Zb complex numbers. If you mean to say one has larger absolute value than the other, then you must say |Za|> |Zb|.

Shing said:
Also
I have been wonder why [tex]\sqrt{4} =2[/tex]
but why NOT -2, negative two?
We define it that way because fractional powers with even denominators give real results only for positive numbers. If we want to be able to say that [itex]\sqrt{x}= x^{1/2}[/itex] (which is a very useful thing to do) and then combine it with other such functions, we need to stick to positive numbers.
 
Thank you so much, Arildno and HallsofIvy!:smile:

But I don't understand that,would you explain a bit more please?
We define it that way because fractional powers with even denominators give real results only for positive numbers. If we want to be able to say that Click to see the LaTeX code for this image (which is a very useful thing to do) and then combine it with other such functions, we need to stick to positive numbers.

imaginary number is so amusing, I am thinking of the geometry meaning of some operations of complex number.

I was thinking if these are true:
[tex]Z_1\times Z_2[/tex] produce a new complex number "vector" [tex]Z_3[/tex]
[tex]{Z_1}^{1/2}\times {Z_2}^{1/2}[/tex]produce a new complex number[tex]Z_3[/tex] too

When I was thinking of the reciprocal of a complex number [tex]Z_1[/tex]

[tex]{1\over {Z_1}} = {{x-iy}\over {x^2+y^2}}[/tex]

I was shocked!

Does that mean [tex]{1\over {Z_1}}[/tex] is [tex]Z_1[/tex]* times the reciprocal of the area of the square magnitude of [tex]Z_1[/tex]([tex]|Z_1|^2[/tex])?

If so, what is the meaning of a reciprocal of an area?

Also, is [tex]{1\over {Z_1}}[/tex] still a complex number?
 
Shing said:
Also, is [tex]{1\over {Z_1}}[/tex] still a complex number?

Yes, it is, unless Z_1 is zero.

Try to relate the geometric meaning of 1/z to the circle inversion.
 
Shing said:
I am thinking that
if the imaginary number is bigger than the other number,
is it right to say that:
i> 5 ?
7i> 3i ?
Does i has magnitude?

if
[tex]Z_1=4+5i[/tex]
then
[tex]Z_2=1-3i[/tex]
whether [tex]Z_1>Z_2 or Z_2>Z_1[/tex] is true?

If we say [tex]Z_a[/tex] is bigger than [tex]Z_b[/tex], does that means the absolute value of these complex number?

Thank you :)
"i" is nothin..as we say an imaginary number n nothin else..when we say that Za is greater than Zb..we mean to take their real part n not the imaginary parts
 
You can however compare absolute values of complexes. If you have [tex]Z_1=4+5i[/tex] and [tex]Z_2=1-3i[/tex] then you can look at [tex]|Z_1|[/tex] and [tex]|Z_2|[/tex].

This will tell you the complex numbers distance away from zero in the complex plane.

In general let [tex]Z = a+Bi[/tex] then [tex]|Z| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2}[/tex]

Now you can say [tex]|Z_1|>|Z_2|[/tex].
 
  • #10
nandu11 said:
"i" is nothin..as we say an imaginary number n nothin else..when we say that Za is greater than Zb..we mean to take their real part n not the imaginary parts

I have never seen such a statement! And, exactly what do you mean by '"i" is nothin"?
 
  • #11
nandu11 said:
"i" is nothin..as we say an imaginary number n nothin else..when we say that Za is greater than Zb..we mean to take their real part n not the imaginary parts
I have never seen anyone say "Za> Zb" when they meant Re(Z_a)> Re(Z_b). And what do you mean by ' "i" is nothin'?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K