Why doesn't √-1×√-1 always equal 1 in complex numbers?

Gourav kumar Lakhera
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
As we know that √-5×√-5=5 i.e multiplication with it self
My question is that according to this √-1×√-1=1.but it does not hold good in case of i(complex number).
I.e i^2 =-1. Why?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Gourav kumar Lakhera said:
As we know that √-5×√-5=5
No, this is not true. ##\sqrt{-5} = i\sqrt{5}## so ##\sqrt{-5} \cdot \sqrt{-5} = i^2 (\sqrt{5})^2 = -5##, not 5 as you show above.
Gourav kumar Lakhera said:
i.e multiplication with it self
My question is that according to this √-1×√-1=1
This isn't true, either, for the same reason as above.
Gourav kumar Lakhera said:
.but it does not hold good in case of i(complex number).
I.e i^2 =-1. Why?

You are apparently using the rule that ##\sqrt a \sqrt b = \sqrt{ab}##. That rule holds only when both a and b are nonnegative real numbers.
 
Thnkuu buddy
 
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...

Similar threads

3
Replies
108
Views
10K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top