Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Complex numbers CONTRADICTION?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    50

    Complex numbers CONTRADICTION?

    hey guys
    1. I proved that z^-1=conj z, converting into mod-arg form and by doing de moivres theorem so this must therefore be true
    1/(2+3i)=2-3i

    2. yet when i substituted z for an actual complex number eg. z=2+3i
    and then did the realisation the answer is different
    1/(2+3i) X (2-3i)/(2-3i)=(2-3i)/13

    3. and i learned of a complex number rule where
    z^-1=conj z/(mod z)^2
    and this rule is consistent with what got ... which was (2-3i)/13

    so now the question finally is why are there 2 answers that seem right?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by aonin View Post
    hey guys
    1. I proved that z^-1=conj z, converting into mod-arg form and by doing de moivres theorem so this must therefore be true
    1/(2+3i)=2-3i

    2. yet when i substituted z for an actual complex number eg. z=2+3i
    and then did the realisation the answer is different
    1/(2+3i) X (2-3i)/(2-3i)=(2-3i)/13

    3. and i learned of a complex number rule where
    z^-1=conj z/(mod z)^2
    and this rule is consistent with what got ... which was (2-3i)/13

    so now the question finally is why are there 2 answers that seem right?
    It's definitely untrue that z^{-1}=\bar{z} since as you noted for z\ne 0 you have that z^{-1}=\frac{\bar{z}}{|z|^2} from where it quickly follows that \bar{z}=z^{-1}\implies z\in\mathbb{S}^1 and the converse can be checked quite readily.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    50
    but it is true z^-1=conj z through demoivres theorem though?. what is the symbol that looks like an E, sorry im new here
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    From
    Florida
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    10
    What were you asked to do originally?

    You have all these work based on something wrong.

    Are you asked to prove or disprove if z^{-1}=\bar{z} \ \mbox{?} If so, an example of why it doesn't suffices which you have. If not, what are you trying to do?
    Last edited by dwsmith; Dec 26th 2010 at 03:46 PM. Reason: Verbage
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    21,363
    Thanks
    2680
    Awards
    1
    There are several mistakes in your OP.
    Consider this fact: z^{ - 1}  = \dfrac{1}{z} = \dfrac{{\overline z }}{{\left| z \right|^2 }}.

    What does that do to what you posted?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by aonin View Post
    but it is true z^-1=conj z through demoivres theorem though?. what is the symbol that looks like an E, sorry im new here
    I don't see how DeMoivre's theorem: \displaystyle (\cos(\theta)+i\sin(\theta))^n=\cos(n\theta)+i\sin  (n\theta), implies this. Aha! I bet I know where you got messed up! You can get from DeMoivre's theorem that \left(\cos(\theta)+i\sin(\theta)\right)^{-1}=\cos\left(-1\theta\right)+i\sin(-\theta)=\cos(\theta)-i\sin(\theta)=\overline{\cos(\theta)+i\sin(\theta)  } and you had a fuzzy idea that every number can be represented as something 'like' \cos(\theta)+i\sin(\theta) but you forgot that it's actually r(\cos(\theta)+i\sin(\theta)) where r=|z|. Thus, this proves once again that the two coincides when 1=r=|z|. As for your question \mathbb{S}^1 is just the unit circle |z|=1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    50
    there was a question regarding graphing 1/z and conj z and they were the same line
    then i realised that through demoivre's theorem that the conj and 1/z could be proved to be equal

    however when i realised the denominator in 1/z where eg. z=2+3i the result is (2+3i)/13 which is consistent to the rule z^-1=conj z/(mod z)^2

    so why are there 2 answers by using 2 methods (demoivre's theorem and realising the denominator), or am i misunderstanding something?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    50
    yep i get what you mean now. i just forgot about the modulus when doing (rcistheta)^-1=r^-1 X cis-theta. thanks for clearing that up
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    From
    Florida
    Posts
    3,093
    Thanks
    10
    You can't graph Complex Numbers like Real Numbers since you are dealing with 4 dimensions.

    w=f(\bar{z}) \ \ \{w\in\mathbb{C}:w\neq 0\}

    \displaystyle\mbox{Circle:} \ w=f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right) \ \ \left\{w\in\mathbb{C}:w\neq 0 \ |w|=\left|\frac{1}{r}\right|\right\}

    \displaystyle x=k: \ \  w=f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right) \ \ \left\{w\in\mathbb{C}:w\neq 0 \ \left|w-\frac{1}{2k}\right|=\left|\frac{1}{2k}\right|\righ  t\}

    \displaystyle y=k: \ \ w=f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right) \ \ \left\{w\in\mathbb{C}:w\neq 0 \ \left|w+\frac{1}{2k}\mathbf{i}\right|=\left|\frac{  1}{2k}\right|\right\}

    Extended Complex Plane includes w=0.
    Last edited by dwsmith; Dec 26th 2010 at 05:24 PM. Reason: Cleaning up appearance
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Flow Master
    mr fantastic's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    From
    Zeitgeist
    Posts
    16,948
    Thanks
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by aonin View Post
    there was a question regarding graphing 1/z and conj z and they were the same line
    then i realised that through demoivre's theorem that the conj and 1/z could be proved to be equal

    however when i realised the denominator in 1/z where eg. z=2+3i the result is (2+3i)/13 which is consistent to the rule z^-1=conj z/(mod z)^2

    so why are there 2 answers by using 2 methods (demoivre's theorem and realising the denominator), or am i misunderstanding something?
    Again we have a situation where, if the original question had been posted rather than some misleading/incorrect interpretation of it, a lot of time and effort would have been saved ....
    Last edited by mr fantastic; Dec 31st 2010 at 04:16 PM. Reason: Test edit.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. raising complex numbers to complex exponents?
    Posted in the Advanced Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Mar 25th 2011, 10:02 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep 27th 2010, 03:14 PM
  3. Imaginary numbers/complex numbers
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Aug 25th 2009, 11:22 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Feb 7th 2009, 06:12 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 24th 2007, 03:49 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum