Why are the cubic roots of 1 expressed as cis 120 degrees?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Yankel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cubic Roots
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression of the cubic roots of 1 in the form of cis 120 degrees, exploring the mathematical reasoning behind this representation and its implications in complex numbers. Participants delve into the nature of roots of unity, particularly focusing on cubic and quartic roots, and the geometric interpretations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why the cubic root of 1 is represented as cis 120 degrees, noting that their own calculation led them to conclude it is simply 1.
  • Another participant provides a mathematical formulation using exponential notation, stating that the cubic roots can be expressed as \(x = e^{\frac{2}{3}\pi ki}\), which translates to cis form.
  • A participant questions the reasoning behind the representation of cubic roots and seeks clarification on the nature of roots, particularly in relation to real versus complex roots.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the cubic equation \(x^3 - 1 = 0\), indicating that while 1 is a real root, there are two complex roots that are conjugates, which are derived from the quadratic factor \(x^2 + x + 1 = 0\).
  • Discussion includes the derivation of the quartic roots of 1, with participants noting that these roots are also evenly spaced around the unit circle, leading to a general formula for \(n\)th roots of unity.
  • One participant emphasizes the geometric interpretation of complex multiplication and its connection to the unit circle, suggesting a deeper mathematical significance to the concept of roots of unity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the representation of cubic roots of 1. While there is acknowledgment that 1 is a root, there is no consensus on the necessity or implications of expressing the roots in terms of cis notation. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the motivations behind these representations and the broader implications in complex analysis.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of distinguishing between real and complex roots, and the discussion touches upon the geometric aspects of roots of unity, which may not be fully explored in the initial queries. There are also references to mathematical derivations that may depend on specific definitions and assumptions not explicitly stated in the discussion.

Yankel
Messages
390
Reaction score
0
Hello

I didn't know in which forum to put this...

I solved a linear algebra question, and my answer was:

{1}^{1/3}

which to my understanding is 1. In the book however, they said it is equal to cis 120k k=0,1,2,...

where 120 is degrees. I tried taking the complex number 1+0i and turn it into it's polar version but did not get 120 degrees. Can you explain to me why the cubic root of 1 is cis 120 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's let:

$$x^3=1=e^{2\pi ki}$$

Hence:

$$x=e^{\frac{2}{3}\pi ki}=\text{cis}\left(\frac{2k}{3}\pi\right)$$
 
I see...

but why did they do it in the first place ?

Am I wrong that the cubic root of 1 is 1 ?

What about the quarter root of 1 ?
 
Yankel said:
I see...

but why did they do it in the first place ?

Am I wrong that the cubic root of 1 is 1 ?

What about the quarter root of 1 ?

If you restrict yourself to real roots, then $x=1$ is the only such real root. However, as I am sure you know, a cubic equation will have 3 roots, and since there is only 1 real root to the equation in question, we know there must be two complex roots, and we know further that they are conjugates.

The quarter or 4th root of 1 will satisfy:

$$x^4=1$$

You can solve this by factoring. In general we will find the $n$th roots of unity to be equally spaced about the unit circle in an Argand diagram, where $$\theta=\frac{2k\pi}{n}$$ with $0\le k<n,\,k\in\mathbb{Z}$.
 
Yankel said:
I see...

but why did they do it in the first place ?

Am I wrong that the cubic root of 1 is 1 ?

What about the quarter root of 1 ?

You're not wrong, but you're not entirely right, either.

First, what do we MEAN by: "a cube root of 1"?

We mean some "number" $x$ such that: $x^3 = 1$. Clearly, 1 works, since: $1^3 = 1$.

Another way to phrase this is:

$x^3 - 1 = 0$

Now, $x^3 - 1 = (x - 1)(x^2 + x + 1)$.

Taking $x = 1$, we see the left factor is 0, so the whole product is 0.

But what if $x \neq 1$? Could it be possible that $x^2 + x + 1 = 0$?

Well, if we use the quadratic formula, with $a = b = c = 1$, we obtain:

$x = \dfrac{-1 \pm \sqrt{1^2 - 4(1)(1)}}{2} = \dfrac{-1 \pm \sqrt{-3}}{2}$

which can be written in the form:

$x = -\dfrac{1}{2} \pm i\dfrac{\sqrt{3}}{2}$.

Note that this is:

$x = \cos\left(\dfrac{2\pi}{3}\right) \pm i\sin\left(\dfrac{2\pi}{3}\right)$

in other words, in the complex plane the "other two cube roots of 1" lie at the angles:

1/3 around the circle, and 2/3 (-1/3) around the unit circle.

You can verify, by direct computation, that if:

$\omega = -\dfrac{1}{2} + i\dfrac{\sqrt{3}}{2}$

that $\omega^2 = \overline{\omega}$, and also that:

$x^2 + x + 1 = (x - \omega)(x - \omega^2)$

(remember, complex solutions to a REAL quadratic come in conjugate-pairs).

The situation is quite analogous for the polynomial:

$x^n - 1$

the roots are:

$\cos\left(\dfrac{2k\pi}{n}\right) + i\sin\left(\dfrac{2k\pi}{n}\right)$

for $k = 0,1,2,\dots,n$.

For $n = 4$ (the fourth roots of 1), we get:

for $k = 0,\ \cos(0) + i\sin(0) = 1 + i0 = 1$.

for $k = 1,\ \cos\left(\dfrac{\pi}{2}\right) + i\sin\left(\dfrac{\pi}{2}\right) = 0 + i1 = i$

for $k = 2,\ \cos(\pi) + i\sin(\pi) = -1 + i0 = -1$

for $k = 3.\ \cos\left(\dfrac{3\pi}{2}\right) + i\sin\left(\dfrac{3\pi}{2}\right) = 0 +i(-1) = -i$.

Indeed, we have: $x^4 + 1 = (x^2 + 1)(x^2 - 1) = (x + i)(x - i)(x + 1)(x - 1)$.

It turns out there is a DEEP connection between $n$-th roots of a number, and $\frac{1}{n}$-th of a circle. The geometrical reason for this is that complex multiplication is "part stretching" and "part rotating".

The circle is a profound mathematical object. I cannot stress this enough. In mathematics we have two "big ideas": the line, and the circle. The extrapolation of these two simple things, leads to a vast array of interesting structures.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K