Solving a Basic Math Contradiction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aeneas
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Contradiction
Aeneas
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Could someone please sort out this contradiction which must come from some very basic error - but where and which error? If you raise -3 to the power of 1/2, this gives the square root of -3 which has no real value, but if you raise it to the power of 2/4, you are finding the fourth root of -3 squared, which is the fourth root of +9 which is real. What is wrong here?

Thanks in anticipation.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Roughly speaking, the "laws of exponents" do not apply to complex numbers in the same way they apply to real numbers. But certainly look at the link Diffy mentioned.
 
Thanks for that, but I do no fully follow the replies in the link. One reply says that when you write p^{a/b}, a and b must be mutually prime. The demonstration that p^{a/b}= \sqrt<b>{p^{a}}</b>seems to work whether they are or not.

e.g. p^{a_{1}/b} X p^{a_{2}/b} ...X p^{a_{b}/b} = p^{ab/b}= p^{a}.

Thus p^{a/b} = \sqrt<b>{p^{a}}</b>. Where is the requirement there that they should be mutually prime? Or is it that the requirement is created by the need not to get into the contradiction?
 
Last edited:
Aeneas said:
Thanks for that, but I do no fully follow the replies in the link. One reply says that when you write p^{a/b}, a and b must be mutually prime.

I am not sure where that person was going with that reply. Certainly one can compute an answer for 64^{2/6}.
I think that what he was getting at is that you are in tricky waters when you start using equalities. For example 64^{2/6} and 64^{1/3} aren't necessarily equal. Consider the polynomials that these two expressions are solutions to, Sqrt(x^6) = 64 and x^3 = 64. For the first wouldn't you say the answer is 4 or -4? and for the second there is only one answer 4. Therefore how could you say the two statements are equal?
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top