Taking a number to a complex number power

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on computing complex powers, specifically 2^(it) and non-integer powers like 2^3.14. It explains that 2^(it) can be expressed as exp(it log 2), leading to a representation involving cosine and sine functions. For non-integer powers, the thread clarifies that 2^3.14 can be computed as exp(3.14 log 2) and provides a rational approximation for 3.14. Additionally, it discusses the convergence of rational sequences to irrational numbers like π, and the use of the natural logarithm for calculations. The conversation concludes with a request for more information on sequences converging to π.
ucbugrad
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
How do you compute the following?

2it where t is a real number

while I am at it, how do you compute powers that are not integers

ie: 23.14
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
2^(it) = exp(it(log2)) = exp(i(tlog2)) = cos(tlog2) + isin(tlog2)

I guess we would define

2^(3.14) = exp(3.14(log2))

I'm not sure if i could write it in any other way, and i doubt i could compute that in my head but they are equivalent.

Sorry for the bad formatting if it isn't clear.

Edit: These logs are base e.
 
Last edited:
"3.14", as opposed to \pi, is a rational number. It is, in fact, 314/100= 157/50 so 2^{3.14}= 2^{157/50}= \sqrt[50]{2^{157}}.

\pi is not rational but there exist a sequence of rational numbers that converge to it (the sequence 3, 3.1, 3.14, ..., for example). 2^\pi is equal to the limit of the sequence 2^3, 2^{3.1}= 2^{31/10}= \sqrt[10]{2^{31}}=, 2^{3.14}= 2^{314/100}= \sqrt[50]{2^{157}},...

Of course, to actually calculate those things you would use 2^a= e^{a ln(2)} as The1337gamer said.
 
Thank you all, both addressed all of my issues. Halls of Ivy: where can I find more about this sequence that converges to Pi? What is the formula for each term?
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

3
Replies
108
Views
10K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top