Series/Function Proof (Complex Numbers)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a series involving complex numbers and roots of unity. The original poster seeks to show that the series 1 + e^(i(2πk/n)) + e^(i(4πk/n)) + ... + e^(i[(2n-2)πk/n]) equals zero when n does not divide k, and equals n when n divides k. The context involves exploring properties of complex exponentials and their summation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the nature of the series and its relation to roots of unity. Some suggest that the arguments of the roots may be shifts of 2π, while others question the original poster's approach and terminology. There is an exploration of the geometric series representation and its implications for the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and questioning assumptions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the geometric series and its relevance to the problem, but there is no explicit consensus on the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original poster misidentified the forum's purpose for their question, indicating a potential misunderstanding of the guidelines. There is also mention of the need to consider the implications of n dividing k versus not dividing k in the context of roots of unity.

moo5003
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
Problem: (I don't have latex/mathtype for this sorry in advance)

Let n,k both be in the Natural Numbers

n does not divide k (I have already completed the case when it does)

Show that the series:

1 + e^i(2pik/n) + e^i(4pik/n) + ... + e^i[(2n-2)pik/n) = 0

Using eulers formula e^ix = cos(x) + isin(x) I used to prove that the above series ='s n if n divides k. I'm having some trouble starting on if n does not divide k. I was wondering if any of you could point me in the right direction as to were to look. I've done a few examples (n=2) etc and shown that it will equal 0 for all odd k (as n cannot divide k) in such a case, though I'm not totally sure I should be using an induction argument for higher cases of n. (didnt use n=1 since it divides all k).

I'm thinking the proof ties into roots of unity since you can use cos(2pi/n) + isin(2pi/n) to construct the n-th roots of unity. Anyways, thanks for any help you can provide :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, you just want to sum the series

[tex]1 + \zeta + \zeta^2 + \zeta^3 + \cdots + \zeta^{n-1},[/tex]

where [itex]\zeta[/itex] is an n-th root of unity?
 
Yes, except each term is to the power k in the natural numbers as well. I have to show that for all k such that n does not divide k the series ='s 0 and for n dividing k it equals n. I have shown the latter and looking for help on the prior.

I'm reading my book and it seems that the I must show that if n does not divide k then the arguments are just shifts of 2pi from the principal arguments between (-pi, pi]. Does this seem like a good way to tackle the problem? Only problem with this I forsee is that even if I show that if n does not divide k then every root of unity is summed together if I can just show that it must be 0 in this case. I'll think about it more.

Edit: I just realized this forum is not for homework, if you could move this thread I would appreciate it. I misread the labels obviously. Sorry for the mishap. (This is a homework problem)
 
Last edited:
[tex]\zeta = e^{2 \pi i k / n}[/tex]

is a perfectly good n-th root of unity.


I don't follow the approach you suggest. I guess I'm confused about what you mean by "principal arguments". Arguments of what? And why are they shifts of 2 pi?

I do think you're overthinking the problem, though.
 
Last edited:
Well, I understand that no matter what natural number you multiply it will end up being a n-th root of unity. The problem I'm having is when you add each root of unity, how do I know they are going to sum to zero? When n divides k each term becomes the root of unity 1 and therefore the sum ='s n. But if n does not divide k the series becomes a summation over different (maybe even every) root of unity which I must prove to sum to zero.

Arguments are just reference to the angle of the root of unity. Usually the principal arguments are in the interval (-pi,pi] though obviously you can add 2pi and still have the same argument. I'm thinking by showing that if n divides k then each n-th root of unity is distinct with arguments shifted by some integer K*2pi and by summing all possible n-th roots of unity you get 0.

Overall, I'm a little lost on how to start the proof which may be the reason for my overthinking possible ways of approaching a method of showing the sum to be 0.
 
It is true that the terms in this sequence consist of all of the (n / gcd(k, n))-th roots of unity, each repeated gcd(k, n) times. That's actually a rather useful fact to know. But that's by far the hard way.

Maybe it will help if you forget for a moment that you're trying to prove the sum is zero, and forget whatever context in which this question arose.

Think of this question as an exercise unto itself: what is the sum of

[tex]1 + \zeta + \zeta^2 + \zeta^3 + \cdots + \zeta^{n-1}?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
K, I proved the sum of the roots of unity are 0.

namely, the roots of unity are roots of x^n -1 = 0 and the sum of every root is equal to b/-a = 0/-1 = 0. (Polynomial theorem I made a lemma).

Thus the sum of the above is 0 since those are the roots of unity.

I'm still having trouble taking that case into the case where each root is to the k power.

0th root + 1st*k root + 2nd*k root...
=
0th root + 1st*k root (mod n) + 2nd*k root (mod n)...
was how I was trying to do it, since by powering each term by k you simply change the order in steps of k instead of 1. I found that this doesn't actually hit every root though, since for example k = 6, n = 10

You have the sum:

0th root + 6th root + 2th root + 8th root + 4th root + 0th root...

Thus I'm still unsure how to prove the overall problem, though I think I'm closer :P.
 
That sum is a geometric series.
 
Thanks for the help, the geometric series gives far greater insight in the mechanics of the problem from a rigorous proof standpoint.

The problem can be seen as a geometric series of the k-th(mod n) root of unity from 0 to n-1. So the limit is:

0/(1-e^(2piK/n) hince equals 0 assuming n does not divide k. If n does divides k then the limit is 0 as proved prior and the above is undefined.

Thanks again Hurkyl, I don't think I would have noticed the geometric series representation as I was more focused on the graphic obviousness when dealing with roots of unity that their sum must go to 0 even with steps of k.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K