B What is the Error in Calculating (e^(iπ))^i?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous Vegetable
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Euler Identity
Anonymous Vegetable
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Before I start, there are only really two pieces of information this concerns and that is the idea that 1x = 1 and that ei*π = -1

So it would follow that (ei*π)i = -1i
And so that would mean that i2i = e which doesn't seem to be right at all. Where is the issue here as there must be one but I am sure I don't have the knowledge required to figure it out.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Anonymous Vegetable said:
the negative number to the power of i however I'm not sure how to sort it
Re-investigate this aspect.
 
Bystander said:
Re-investigate this aspect.
I've edited it to make another point anyway hahaha but yeah I shall
 
Point of order: please do NOT make changes to your original post. It makes very confusing reading for late arriving participants.
 
  • Like
Likes Jehannum
Bystander said:
Point of order: please do NOT make changes to your original post. It makes very confusing reading for late arriving participants.
My humbumblest apologies and it shan't happen again.
 
Anonymous Vegetable said:
it shan't happen again.
De nada. You're new to the forum.
 
Not all exponentiation laws work with complex numbers, and with a complex base those exponents are not unique any more.

$$i^{2i} = e^{2i \log(i)} = e^{2i (i \pi/2)} = e^{- \pi}$$ using the principal value of the logarithm, indeed.
 
  • #10
I just find it amusing that what appears to be an extremely non real value seems to equal a simple real number
 
  • #11
mfb said:
Not all exponentiation laws work with complex numbers, and with a complex base those exponents are not unique any more.

$$i^{2i} = e^{2i \log(i)} = e^{2i (i \pi/2)} = e^{- \pi}$$ using the principal value of the logarithm, indeed.
I assume your log refers to ln? Sorry just being picky
 
  • #12
Anonymous Vegetable said:
I assume your log refers to ln? Sorry just being picky

Outside of high school, logarithms with base ##e## are always denoted as ##\log##. The notation ln is not really used anymore.
 
  • #13
micromass said:
Outside of high school, logarithms with base ##e## are always denoted as ##\log##. The notation ln is not really used anymore.
I don't believe that's true. Every calculus textbook I have distinguishes between log (meaning base-10 logarithm) and ln. Granted, all of my textbooks are at least 15 to 20 years, and some are older.
 
  • Like
Likes weirdoguy
  • #14
Mark44 said:
micromass said:
Outside of high school, logarithms with base ##e## are always denoted as ##\log##. The notation ln is not really used anymore.
I don't believe that's true. Every calculus textbook I have distinguishes between log (meaning base-10 logarithm) and ln. Granted, all of my textbooks are at least 15 to 20 years, and some are older.
I know it adds little to the conversation, but I have to concur. Pretty much all my textbooks use ln. Maybe it's an undergrad thing?
 
  • #15
Anonymous Vegetable said:
So it would follow that (ei*π)i = -1i
And so that would mean that i2i = e-π which doesn't seem to be right at all. Where is the issue here as there must be one but I am sure I don't have the knowledge required to figure it out.
What seems to be the problem? I don't see one.
 
Back
Top