Understanding the 'ERR: Nonreal Ans' Error with Psi and Phi

  • Thread starter Thread starter eric.l
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Phi Psi
eric.l
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I just had a question involving both psi and phi. I know that:

Ψ= (1-√5)/2 = -0.618033989...
Φ= (1+√5)/2 = 1.618033989...

And out of boredom, I decided to put into my calculator:
(Φ^Ψ) = 0.7427429446...

But my question rose from there: What happens if you do (Ψ^Φ)? I plugged it in and got ERR:Nonreal Ans and couldn't distinguish why that had happened. So, I went to my math teacher and he had no idea. I then went to my statistics teacher and he had said the only way he could see an error was some sort of correlation involving squaring a negative number, which may have some similarity with taking the square root of a negative number as well. To see if he was right, I tested:

(-√(5))^(√(5))

To get the same error. My question is, why does this happen and what exactly is this error?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Powers of negative numbers are not well-defined in the real number system.

Basically, we can make sense of (-1)^2, ~(-1)^3 and others, but that is only for integer exponents!

Once we come to non-integer exponents, then things stop being defined. Things like (-1)^{1/2} or (-1)^\pi are not defined anymore. This is sharp contrast with powers of positive numbers!

Of course, it is possible to extend the real number system to define expressions such as the above. This extension is called the complex number system. Things like (-1)^{1/2}, (-1)^\pi or (-\sqrt{5})^{\sqrt{5}} are defined there. They are complex numbers, but not imaginary.

If you want to play around with complex numbers and powers of negative numbers, you can always check wolfram alpha.
 
micromass said:
Powers of negative numbers are not well-defined in the real number system.

Basically, we can make sense of (-1)^2, ~(-1)^3 and others, but that is only for integer exponents!

Once we come to non-integer exponents, then things stop being defined. Things like (-1)^{1/2} or (-1)^\pi are not defined anymore. This is sharp contrast with powers of positive numbers!

Of course, it is possible to extend the real number system to define expressions such as the above. This extension is called the complex number system. Things like (-1)^{1/2}, (-1)^\pi or (-\sqrt{5})^{\sqrt{5}} are defined there. They are complex numbers, but not imaginary.

If you want to play around with complex numbers and powers of negative numbers, you can always check wolfram alpha.

Definitely makes more sense with an explanation rather than a simple inference, thank you so much!
 
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