Verifying I2=1: Right or Wrong?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ranjitnepal
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression I2=1, where participants analyze the validity of manipulating the square root of negative one (i) and its implications in complex number theory. The scope includes conceptual clarifications and technical reasoning regarding the properties of complex numbers and exponents.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the manipulation leading to I2=1 is incorrect, emphasizing that moving the exponent inside the radical is a mistake.
  • Others suggest that the paradoxes arising from such manipulations indicate interesting properties of complex exponents, particularly their multivalued nature.
  • A participant questions the initial definitions used, arguing that defining "i" as √-1 is problematic since -1 exists prior to the definition of complex numbers.
  • Another participant proposes a more rigorous definition of complex numbers using ordered pairs, which they argue clarifies the operations involving i.
  • Some participants reiterate the confusion surrounding the notation, specifically the use of "I" instead of "i".

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity of the initial manipulation leading to I2=1, with multiple competing views on the definitions and properties of complex numbers. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correctness of the original claim.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the definitions and assumptions made about complex numbers, particularly regarding the treatment of square roots and the implications of multivalued functions. The discussion highlights the need for careful consideration of mathematical definitions in the context of complex analysis.

ranjitnepal
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
please tell me the solution i did is right or wrong and why?

we know,
I=√-1
I2=√-1*√-1 =√(-1)2 = √1 = 1
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Please read this: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=637214
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wrong, you cannot move the exponent inside the radical. That you arrived at -1=1 is a sign of a mistake.
 
Last edited:
lurflurf said:
Wron, you cannot move the exponent inside the radical. That you arrived at -1=1 is a sign of a mistake.

A mistake? For sure. But a very interesting mistake. "Paradoxes" of these kind indicate that something very interesting is going on with complex exponents. In particular, they indicate that complex exponents (such as roots) are multivalued. Once you take this approach, all paradoxes vanish :-p
 
ranjitnepal said:
please tell me the solution i did is right or wrong and why?

we know,
I=√-1
I2=√-1*√-1 =√(-1)2 = √1 = 1

Would it be enough just to accept the definition so that we use both of these:

i*i=-1 and i=sqrt(-1)This is what happens with (-i).
(-i)*(-i)=(-1)(-1)*i*i=(1)*(-1)=-1
What went wrong there?
Apparantly i*i=-1 and (-i)(-i)=-1.

Still seem good. i*i still -1 and (-1)(-1)=1
 
Last edited:
micromass said:
"Paradoxes" of these kind indicate that something very interesting is going on with complex exponents. In particular, they indicate that complex exponents (such as roots) are multivalued.

Yeah, similarly, by naively taking the natural logarithm of both sides of equation [itex]e^{0}=e^{2\pi i}[/itex] one gets the result [itex]0=2\pi i[/itex].
 
ranjitnepal said:
please tell me the solution i did is right or wrong and why?

we know,
I=√-1
Well, there are your first two errors! To begin with, it is "i", not "I"!
(I suspect your editor automatically changed your "i" to "I". So did mine- I had to "fool" it by typing "ia", then going back and deleting the "a"!)
More importantly, it is a mistake to write "[itex]a= \sqrt{-1}[/itex] because there is no such number before we define "i" and you can't define a new number to be something that doesn't exist to begin with! Defining "i" to be "the number whose square is -1" is better because -1, at least, does exist before we define the complex numbers. But has the difficulty that once we start working with the complex numbers we find that every number, except 0, has two square roots and this does not tell us which of the two roots of -1 "i" is.

Better is to define the complex numbers to be the set of orderd pairs of real numbers, (a, b), with addition defined by (a, b)+ (c, d)= (a+ b, c+ d) and multiplication by (a, b)*(c, d)= (ac- bc, ad+ bc). We can then identify the real numbers with pairs of the form (x, 0) and "i" with (0, 1).

I2=√-1*√-1 =√(-1)2 = √1 = 1
With the "ordered pairs" definition, above, [tex]i^2= (0, 1)(0, 1)= (0(0)-(1)(1), 0(1)+ 0(1))= (-1, 0)[tex]which we have already identified with the real number -1.[/tex][/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K