Sie sind auf Seite 1von 25

Complex numbers: quadratic and cubic equations

1 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/cubic.html

Mathematics reawakened in Western Europe in the 13th century. At that time works in mathematics were
translated from the Arabic into Latin allowing Western European scholars to learn about the medieval Arabiclanguage mathematics and the older Greek mathematics, such as Euclid's Elements. In all this mathematics,
only positive numbers were considered to be numbers. Negative numbers were not yet accepted as entities.
(Some ancient cultures, including that of China and India, accepted negative numbers, but not the ones
mentioned above.)
Solution of quadratics.
With negative numbers we understand that every quadratic equation in the variable x can be written in the
form
ax2 + bx + c = 0,
where a, b, and c are constants. We also know that the general solution is given by the quadratic formula:

where there are two distinct real solutions if the discriminant b2 4ac is positive, one double real solution if
the discriminant is 0, and no real solutions if the discriminant is negative.
Back in the 15th century, this was not understood. Instead, quadratic equations were classified into four
different kinds depending on the signs of the coefficients a, b, and c. Since the leading coefficient a is not
zero in a quadratic equation, you can always divide by it to get an equivalent quadratic equation where a
equals 1, that is, x2 + bx + c = 0. This one form gives rise to four forms when you move the negative terms to
the other side of the equation and when you drop zero terms from the equation:
x2 = c
x2 + bx = c
x2 + c = bx

22/03/2015 05:35 PM

Complex numbers: quadratic and cubic equations

2 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/cubic.html

x2 = bx + c
There are other forms, but either they have no solutions among the positive numbers or else they can be
reduced to linear equations. Each of these forms required a different form of a solution. With hindsight, we
see that the 15th century solutions are just special cases of the quadratic formula. One would think that the
consolidation of four cases into one might be enough justification for accepting negative numbers, but
apparently it wasn't. It seems to take a lot of time before people will extend their concept of number to
include new entities.

Solution of cubics.
Equations of the third degree are called cubic
equations. The general form of a cubic is, after
dividing by the leading coefficient,
x3 + bx2 + cx + d = 0,
As with the quadratic equation, there are several
forms for the cubic when negative terms are
moved to the other side of the equation and zero
terms dropped.
Back in the 16th century it was a big deal to solve
cubic equations. There was a great controversy in
Italy between Cardano (15011576) and Tartaglia
(14991557) about who should get credit for
solving the cubic equation. Any book on the
history of mathematics will go into the details of
this fascinating controversy. Whats interesting to
us, though, is that negative numbers were
becoming legitimatized, a deeper insight into
equations was developed, and the first inkling of
a complex number appeared. Incidentally, at this time symbolic algebra had not been developed, so all the
equations were written in words instead of symbols!
Cardano, in his Artiss Magn, or Great Art, found negative solutions to equations, and he called these
numbers fictitious. He also noted an important fact connecting solutions of a cubic equation to its
coefficients, namely, the sum of the solutions is the negation of b, the coefficient of the x2 term. At one other
point, he mentions that the problem of dividing 10 into two parts so that their product is 40 would have to be
5 + (15) and 5 (15).

Bombellis investigations of complex numbers


Cardano did not go further into what later became to be called complex numbers than
that observation, but a few years later Bombelli (15261572) gave several examples
involving these new beasts. Heres one example.
One of Cardanos cubic formulas gives the solution to the equation x3 = cx + d as

22/03/2015 05:35 PM

Complex numbers: quadratic and cubic equations

3 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/cubic.html

where e = (d/2)2 (c/3)3). Bombelli used this to solve the equation x3 = 15x + 4 to get
the solution

Now, the square root of 121 is not a real number; its neither positive, negative, nor
zero. Bombelli continued to work with this expression until he found equations that
lead him to the solution 4. He determined that

and, therefore, the solution x = 4. You can check those equations are correct by cubing 2 1 to get
2 111.
This example is not given to show that Bombelli knew everything there is to know about complex numbers,
only that he was starting to understand them.

On to The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra

Back to Introduction
1999, 2013
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:35 PM

Complex numbers: the fundamental theorem of algebra

1 of 2

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/fta.html

As remarked before, in the 16th century Cardano noted that the sum of the three solutions to a cubic equation
x3 + bx2 + cx + d = 0
is b, the negation of the coefficient of x2. By the 17th century the theory of equations had developed so far
as to allow Girard (15951632) to state a principle of algebra, what we call now the fundamental theorem of
algebra. His formulation, which he didnt prove, also gives a general relation between the n solutions to an
nth degree equation and its n coefficients.
An nth degree equation can be written in modern notation as
xn + a1xn1 + ... + an2x2 + an1x + an = 0
where the coefficients a1, ..., an2, an1, and an are all constants. Girard said that an nth degree equation
admits of n solutions, if you allow all roots and count roots with multiplicity. So, for example, the equation
x2 + 1 = 0 has the two solutions 1 and 1, and the equation x2 2x + 1 = 0 has the two solutions 1 and 1.
Girard wasnt particularly clear what form his solutions were to have, just that there be n of them: x1, x2, ...,
xn1, and xn.
Girard gave the relation between the n roots x1, x2, ..., xn, and xn and the n coefficients a1, ..., an2, an1, and
an that extends Cardanos remark. First, the sum of the roots x1 + x2 + ..., + xn is a1, the negation of the
coefficient of xn1 (Cardanos remark). Next, the sum of all products of pairs of solutions is a2. Next, the sum
of all products of triples of solutions is a3. And so on until the product of all n solutions is either an (when n
is even) or an (when n is odd).
Heres an example. The 4th degree equation
x4 6x3 + 3x2 + 26x 24 = 0
has the four solutions 2, 1, 3, and 4. The sum of the solutions equals 6, that is 2 + 1 + 3 + 4 = 6. The sum of
all products of pairs (six of them) is
(2)(1) + (2)(3) + (2)(4) + (1)(3) + (1)(4) + (3)(4)

22/03/2015 05:36 PM

Complex numbers: the fundamental theorem of algebra

2 of 2

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/fta.html

which is 3. The sum of all products of triples (four of them) is


(2)(1)(3) + (2)(1)(4) + (2)(3)(4) + (1)(3)(4)
which is 26. And the product of all four solutions is 24.
Descartes (15961650) also studied this relation between solutions and coefficients, and showed more
explicitly why the relationship holds. Descartes called negative solutions false and treated other solutions
(that is, complex numbers) imaginary.
Over the remainder of the 17th century, negative numbers rose in status to be fullfledged numbers. But
complex numbers remained in limbo through most of the 18th century. They werent considered to be real
numbers, but they were useful in the theory of equations. It wasnt even clear what form the solutions to
equations might take. Certainly complex numbers of the form a + b1 were sufficient to solve quadratic
equations, but it wasnt clear they were enough to solve cubic and higher-degree equations. Also, the part of
the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra which stated there actually are n solutions of an nth degree equation
was yet to be proved, pending, of course, some description of the possible forms that the solutions might
take.

On to The number i

Back to Quadratic and cubic equations


1999
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:36 PM

Complex numbers: the number i

1 of 2

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/numberi.html

Although the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra was still not proved in the 18th century, and complex
numbers were not fully understood, the square root of minus one was being used more and more.
Analysis, especially calculus and the theory of differential equations, was making great headway. Certain
functions, including the trigonometric functions and exponential functions, appear in solutions to integrals
and differential equations. Euler (17071783) made the observation, here written in modern notation, that
eix = cos x + i sin x
where i denotes 1. This is an equation which allows you to interpret the exponentiation of an imaginary
number ix as having a real part, cos x, and an imaginary part, i sin x. This was an especially useful
observation in the solution of differential equations. Because of this and other uses of i, it became quite
acceptable for use in mathematics. Euler, a very influential mathematician, recommended the general use of
these imaginary numbers in his Introduction to Algebra.
By the end of the 18th century numbers of the form x + yi were in fairly common use by research
mathematicians, and it became common to represent them as points in the plane. The standard convention
now in use to display them is to place the real numbers, that is, those numbers of the form x + 0i, on the
horizontal x-axis, with positive numbers to the right and negative ones to the left. Also, imaginary numbers,
that is, those numbers of the form 0 + yi, on the vertical y-axis, where positive values of y are up, and
negative ones down. Thus, i is located one unit above 0 (the origin, where the axes meet), and i is located
one unit below 0.
This particular display of numbers of the form x + yi is attributed to various individuals including Wessel,
Argand, and Gauss. It was easy to come by, since the usual (x,y)-coordinates for the plane had been used for
over a century. Nonetheless, it is a very useful way to understand these numbers.

The Fundamental Theorem of Algebraproved!


Still, at nearly the end of the 18th century, it wasnt yet known what form all the solutions of a polynomial
equation might take. Gauss published in 1799 his first proof that an nth degree equation has n roots each of
the form a + bi, for some real numbers a and b. Once he had done that, it was known that complex numbers
(in the sense of solutions to algebraic equations) were the numbers a + bi, and it was appropriate to call the
xy-plane the complex plane.

22/03/2015 05:37 PM

Complex numbers: the number i

2 of 2

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/numberi.html

In some sense all the historical discussion before Gauss was prehistory of complex numbers. But thats just
the history that is useful in understanding the need for complex numbers. Although there are other concepts
of numbers that either go beyond complex numbers or include something other than complex numbers, we
know that at least no other numbers are needed to solve polynomial equations. The use of complex
numbers pervades all of mathematics and its applications to science.
Next section: The complex plane, addition and subtraction
Previous section: The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra

On to The complex plane, addition and subtraction

Back to The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra


1999
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:37 PM

Complex numbers: the complex plane, addition and subtraction

1 of 4

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/plane.html

Since Gauss proved the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, we know that all complex numbers are of the
form x + yi, where x and y are real numbers, real numbers being all those numbers which are positive,
negative, or zero. Therefore, we can use the xy-plane to display complex numbers. We'll even call it the
complex plane when we use the xy-plane that way. That gives us a second way to complex numbers, the first
way being algebraically as in the expression x + yi.

Notation.
The standard symbol for the set of all complex numbers is C, and we'll also refer to the complex plane as C.
We'll try to use x and y for real variables, and z and w for complex variables. For example, the equation
z = x + yi is to be understood as saying that the complex number z is the sum of the real number x and the real

22/03/2015 05:37 PM

Complex numbers: the complex plane, addition and subtraction

2 of 4

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/plane.html

number y times i. In general, the x part of a complex number z = x + yi is called the real part of z, while y is
called the imaginary part of z. (Sometimes yi is called the imaginary part.)
When we use the xy-plane for the complex plane C, we'll call the x-axis by the name real axis, and the y-axis
we'll call the imaginary axis.
Real numbers are to be considered as special cases of complex numbers; they're just the numbers x + yi when
y is 0, that is, they're the numbers on the real axis. For instance, the real number 2 is 2 + 0i. The numbers on
the imaginary axis are sometimes called purely imaginary numbers.

Arithmetic operations on C
The operations of addition and subtraction are easily understood. To add or subtract two complex numbers,
just add or subtract the corresponding real and imaginary parts. For instance, the sum of 5 + 3i and 4 + 2i is
9 + 5i. For another, the sum of 3 + i and 1 + 2i is 2 + 3i.
Addition can be represented graphically on the complex plane C. Take the last example. The complex
number z = 3 + i is located 3 units to the right of the imaginary axis and 1 unit above the real axis, while
w = 1 + 2i is located 1 unit left and 2 units up. So the sum z + w = 2 + 3i is 2 units right and 3 units up.

Parallelogram Rule.
Note in the last example that the four complex numbers 0, z = 3 + i, w = 1 + 2i, and z + w = 2 + 3i are the
corners of a parallelogram. This is generally true. To find where in the plane C the sum z + w of two complex
numbers z and w is located, plot z and w, draw lines from 0 to each of them, and complete the parallelogram.
The fourth vertex will be z + w.

22/03/2015 05:37 PM

Complex numbers: the complex plane, addition and subtraction

3 of 4

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/plane.html

Addition as translation.
Using the parallelogram rule can interpret addition by w as a transformation of the plane C. Adding w to 0
gives w, of course, so 0 is moved to w in this transformation. Any other point z is moved to z + w, so z is
moved in the same direction the same distance. In other words, every point in C is moved the same direction
and distance when w is added to it. We can say that addition by w gives a translation the plane C in the
direction and distance from 0 to w. The term "vector" is usually used in the description: "the plane is
translated along the vector 0w.

Negation and Subtraction.


There's a nice geometric interpretation of
negation, too. Of course, the negation of x + yi is
x yi, so the negation of a complex number will
be located just opposite 0 and the same distance
away. For example, z = 2 + i is located 2 units
right and one unit up, so its negation z = 2 i
is located 2 units left and one unit down.
Negation can be interpreted as a transformation
of the plane C, too. If you rotate the plane 180
around 0, then every point z is sent to its negation
z. Thus, negation gives a 180 rotation.
From addition and negation, you can determine what the geometric rule is for subtraction. To find where
z w will be, first negate w by finding the point opposite 0, then use the parallelogram rule.
We can interpret subtraction of w as a transformation of C: the plane is translated along the vector from 0 to
w. Another way of saying that is that the plane is translated along the vector w0.

22/03/2015 05:37 PM

Complex numbers: absolute value

1 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/abs.html

An important concept for numbers, either real or complex is that of absolute value. Recall that the absolute
value |x| of a real number x is itself, if it's positive or zero, but if x is negative, then its absolute value |x| is its
negation x, that is, the corresponding positive value. For example, |3| = 3, but |4| = 4. The absolute value
function strips a real number of its sign.
For a complex number z = x + yi, we define the
absolute value |z| as being the distance from z to 0
in the complex plane C. This will extend the
definition of absolute value for real numbers, since
the absolute value |x| of a real number x can be
interpreted as the distance from x to 0 on the real
number line. We can find the distance |z| by using
the Pythagorean theorem. Consider the right
triangle with one vertex at 0, another at z and the
third at x on the real axis directly below z (or
above z if z happens to be below the real axis). The
horizontal side of the triangle has length |x|, the
vertical side has length |y|, and the diagonal side
has length |z|. Therefore,
|z|2 = x2 + y2.
(Note that for real numbers like x, we can drop
absolute value when squaring, since |x|2 = x2.) That
gives us a formula for |z|, namely,

The unit circle.


Some complex numbers have absolute value 1. Of course, 1 is the absolute value of both 1 and 1, but it's

22/03/2015 05:38 PM

Complex numbers: absolute value

2 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/abs.html

also the absolute value of both i and i since they're both one unit away from 0 on the imaginary axis. The
unit circle is the circle of radius 1 centered at 0. It include all complex numbers of absolute value 1, so it has
the equation |z| = 1.

A complex number z = x + yi will lie on the unit circle when x2 + y2 = 1. Some examples, besides 1, 1, i, and
1 are 2/2 i2/2, where the pluses and minuses can be taken in any order. They are the four points at the
intersections of the diagonal lines y = x and y = x with the unit circle. We'll see them later as square roots of i
and i.
You can find other complex numbers on the unit circle from Pythagorean triples. A Pythagorean triple
consists of three whole numbers a, b, and c such that a2 + b2 = c2 If you divide this equation by c2, then you
find that (a/c)2 + (b/c)2 = 1. That means that a/c + i b/c is a complex number that lies on the unit circle. The
best known Pythagorean triple is 3:4:5. That triple gives us the complex number 3/5 + i 4/5 on the unit circle.
Some other Pythagorean triples are 5:12:13, 15:8:17, 7:24:25, 21:20:29, 9:40:41, 35:12:27, and 11:60:61. As
you might expect, there are infinitely many of them. (For a little more on Pythagorean triples, see the end of
the page at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/trig/right.html.)

The triangle inequality.


There's an important property of
complex numbers relating addition to
absolute value called the triangle

22/03/2015 05:38 PM

Complex numbers: absolute value

3 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/abs.html

inequality. If z and w are any two


complex numbers, then

You can see this from the


parallelogram rule for addition.
Consider the triangle whose vertices
are 0, z, and z + w. One side of the
triangle, the one from 0 to z + w has
length |z + w|. A second side of the
triangle, the one from 0 to z, has
length |z|. And the third side of the
triangle, the one from z to z + w, is
parallel and equal to the line from 0 to
w, and therefore has length |w|. Now,
in any triangle, any one side is less than or equal to the sum of the other two sides, and, therefore, we have
the triangle inequality displayed above.

On to Angles and polar coordinates

Back to The complex plane, addition and subtraction


1999
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:38 PM

Complex numbers: multiplication

1 of 5

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/mult.html

Multiplication done algebraically.


Complex multiplication is a more difficult operation to understand from either an algebraic or a geometric
point of view. Lets do it algebraically first, and lets take specific complex numbers to multiply, say 3 + 2i
and 1 + 4i. Each has two terms, so when we multiply them, well get four terms:
(3 + 2i)(1 + 4i) = 3 + 12i + 2i + 8i2.
Now the 12i + 2i simplifies to 14i, of course. What about the 8i2? Remember we introduced i as an
abbreviation for 1, the square root of 1. In other words, i is something whose square is 1. Thus, 8i2
equals 8. Therefore, the product (3 + 2i)(1 + 4i) equals 5 + 14i.
If you generalize this example, youll get the general rule for multiplication

Remember that (xu yv), the real part of the product, is the product of the real parts minus the product of the
imaginary parts, but (xv + yu), the imaginary part of the product, is the sum of the two products of one real
part and the other imaginary part.
Lets look at some special cases of multiplication.

Multiplying a complex number by a real number


In the above formula for multiplication, if v is zero, then you get a formula for multiplying a complex number
x + yi and a real number u together:
(x + yi) u = xu + yu i.
In other words, you just multiply both parts of the complex number by the real number. For example, 2 times
3 + i is just 6 + 2i. Geometrically, when you double a complex number, just double the distance from the
origin, 0. Similarly, when you multiply a complex number z by 1/2, the result will be half way between 0 and
z. You can think of multiplication by 2 as a transformation which stretches the complex plane C by a factor of

22/03/2015 05:39 PM

Complex numbers: multiplication

2 of 5

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/mult.html

2 away from 0; and multiplication by 1/2 as a transformation which squeezes C toward 0.

Multiplication and absolute value.


Even though weve only done one case for multiplication, its enough to suggest that the absolute value of zw
(i.e., distance from 0 to zw) might be the absolute value of z times the absolute value of w. It was when w was
the real number u just above. In fact, this is true in general:

The verification of this identity is an exercise in algebra. In order to prove it, well prove its true for the
squares so we dont have to deal with square roots. Well show |zw|2 = |z|2|w|2. Let z be x + yi, and let w be
u + vi. Then, according to the formula for multiplication, zw equals (xu yv) + (xv + yu)i. Recall from the
section on absolute values that
|z|2 = x2 + y2
Similarly, we have
|w|2 = u2 + v2
and, since zw = (xu yv) + (xv + yu)i,
|wz|2 = (xu yv)2 + (xv + yu)2
So, in order to show |zw|2 = |z|2|w|2, all you have to do is show that
(xu yv)2 + (xv + yu)2 = (x2 + y2) (u2 + v2)
and thats a straightforward exercize in algebra.

Powers of i.

22/03/2015 05:39 PM

Complex numbers: multiplication

3 of 5

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/mult.html

For our next special case of multiplication, consider the various powers of the imaginary unit i. We started
with the assumption that i2 = 1. What about i3? Its just i2 times i, and thats 1 times i. Therefore, i3 = i.
Thats interesting: the cube of i is its own negation. Next consider i4. Thats
the square of i2, that is, the square of 1. So i4 = 1. In other words, i is a
fourth root of 1. You can show that i is another fourth root of 1. And since
both 1 and 1 are square roots of 1, we now know all four fourth roots of 1,
namely, 1, i, 1, and i. This observation connects to the Fundamental
Theorem of Algebra since the equation z4 = 1 is a fourth-degree equation so
must have exactly four roots.
Higher powers of i are easy to find now that we know i4 = 1. For example, i5
is i times i4, and thats just i. You can reduce the power of i by 4 and not
change the result. For another example, i11 = i7 = i3 = i.
How about negative powers of i? What is the reciprocal of i, that is, i1? For the same reason that you can
subtract 4 from a power of i and not change the result, you can also add 4 to the power of i. That means i1 =
i3 = i. Thus, the reciprocal of i is i. Imaginea number whose reciprocal is its own negation! Of course, its
easy to check that i times i is 1, so, of course, i and i are reciprocals.

Roots of unity.
The various roots of 1 are called roots of unity. In general, by the Fundamental
Theorem of Algebra, the number of n-th roots of unity is n, since there are n
roots of the n-th degree equation zu 1 = 0. The square roots of unity are 1
and 1. The fourth roots are 1, i, as noted earlier in the section on absolute
value. Also, in that section, it was mentioned that 2/2 i2/2 were square
roots of i and i, and now with the formula for multiplication, thats easy to
verify. Therefore, the eight eight-roots of unity are 1, i, and 2/2 i2/2.
Notice how these eight roots of unity are equally spaced around the unit circle.
We can use geometry to find some other roots of unity, in particular the cube roots and sixth roots of unity.
But lets wait a little bit for them.

Multiplying a complex number by i.


In our goal toward finding a geometric interpretation of complex multiplication, let's consider next
multiplying an arbitrary complex number z = x + yi by i.
z i = (x + yi) i = y + xi.
Let's interpret this statement geometrically. The point
z in C is located x units to the right of the imaginary
axis and y units above the real axis. The point z i is
located y units to the left, and x units above. What has
happened is that multiplying by i has rotated to point z
90 counterclockwise around the origin to the point
z i. Stated more briefly, multiplication by i gives a 90

22/03/2015 05:39 PM

Complex numbers: multiplication

4 of 5

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/mult.html

counterclockwise rotation about 0.


You can analyze what multiplication by i does in the
same way. You'll find that multiplication by i gives a
90 clockwise rotation about 0. When we don't
specify counterclockwise or clockwise when referring
to rotations or angles, we'll follow the standard
convention that counterclockwise is intended. Then
we can say that multiplication by i gives a 90
rotation about 0, or if you prefer, a 270 rotation about
0.

A geometric interpretation of multiplication.


To completely justify what we're about to see, trigonometry is needed, and that is done in an optional section.
For now, we'll see the results without the justification. We've seen two special cases of multiplication, one by
reals which leads to scaling, the other by i which leads to rotation. The general case is a combination of
scaling and rotation.
Let z and w be points in the complex plane C. Draw the lines from
0 to z, and 0 to w. The lengths of these lines are the absolute values
|z| and |w|, respectively. We already know the length of the line
from 0 to zw is going to be the absolute value |zw| which equals
|z| |w|. (In the diagram, |z| is about 1.6, and |w| is about 2.1, so |zw|
should be about 3.4. Note that the unit circle is shaded in.) What
we don't know is the direction of the line from 0 to zw.
The answer is that angles add. We'll determine the direction of
the line from 0 to z by a certain angle, called the argument of z,
sometimes denoted arg(z). This is the angle whose vertex is 0, the
first side is the positive real axis, and the second side is the line
from 0 to z. The other point w has angle arg(w). Then the product
zw will have an angle which is the sum of the angles
arg(z) + arg(w). (In the diagram, arg(z) is about 20, and arg(w) is
about 45, so arg(zw) should be about 65.)
In summary, we have two equations which determine where zw is located in C:

On to Reciprocals, conjugation, and division

22/03/2015 05:39 PM

Complex numbers: angles and polar coordinates

1 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/polar.html

This section assumes a knowledge of trigonometry. For information on trigonometry, see Daves
Short Trig Course at
http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/trig/

Polar coordinates will help us understand complex numbers


geometrically. On the one hand, the usual rectangular coordinates
x and y specify a complex number z = x + yi by giving the
distance x right and the distance y up. On the other hand, polar
coordinates specify the same point z by saying how far r away
from the origin 0, and the angle for the line from the origin to
the point. Weve already called the distance r the absolute value
|z| of z, and we saw how the Pythagorean theorem gave relation
between it and x and y:

Next, we need to deal with the angle . Well follow the standard
convention for specifying the angle . This convention takes the
positive x-axis (our real axis) to be at angle 0, the positive y-axis
(our imaginary axis) at angle 90, the negative x-axis angle 180, and the negative y-axis at angle 270. Also,
360 can be added or subtracted from any angle and the direction is not changes. So, 0, 360, 720, and
360 all refer to the positive x-axis. Similarly, 270 and 90 both refer to the negative y-axis. A 45 angle
runs along the line y = x, up to the right. And so forth.

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: angles and polar coordinates

2 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/polar.html

A point z can be specified by either pair, the pair of rectangular coordinates, x and y, or the pair of polar
coordinates, r, which is |z|, and , which is arg (z). Since either pair determines the point, each pair should
determine the other pair. There should be four equations,
connecting them, and so there are. The Pythagorean identity was
mentioned above, but the others require trigonometry. From the
same triangle we used for the Pythagorean theorem, we find the
following three relations:
tan

= y/x, x = r cos , and y = r sin .

Now, if we apply these relations to our complex number


z = x + yi, then we get an alternate description for z
z = x + iy
= r cos + i r sin
= r (cos + i sin )
= |z| (cos + i sin )
Note that the complex number cos + i sin has absolute value 1 since cos2 + sin2 equals 1 for any angle
. Thus, every complex number z is the product of a real number |z| and a complex number cos + i sin .
Were almost to the point where we can prove
the last unproved statement of the previous
section on multiplication, namely, that
arg(zw) = arg(z) + arg(w). As above, we take
arg(z) to be , and now let arg(w) be . Then,

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: angles and polar coordinates

3 of 3

z = |z| (cos

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/polar.html

+ i sin )

and
w = |w| (cos

+ i sin )

We need to show that arg(zw) is


words

+ . In other

zw = |zw| (cos ( + ) + i sin ( + ))


If we use the addition formulas for cosine and
sine at one crucial point, well have it. Recall
from trigonometry these addition formulas:
cos ( + ) = cos

cos

sin ( + ) = cos sin

sin sin
+ sin cos .

Now were ready to show arguments add in the product zw.


zw = |z| (cos + i sin ) |w| (cos + i sin )
= |zw| (cos + i sin ) (cos + i sin )
= |zw| ((cos cos sin sin ) + i(cos
= |zw| (cos ( + ) + i sin ( + ))

sin

+ sin

cos ))

Thus, arg(zw) is + , as claimed.

On to Multiplication

Back to Absolute value


1999
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: reciprocals, conjugates, and division

1 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/div.html

Weve studied addition, subtraction, and multiplication. Now its time for division. Just as subtraction can be
compounded from addition and negation, division can be compounded from multiplication and reciprocation.
So we set ourselves the problem of finding 1/z given z. In other words, given a complex number z = x + yi,
find another complex number w = u + vi such that zw = 1. By now, we can do that both algebraically and
geometrically. First, algebraically. Well use the product formula we developed in the section on
multiplication. It said
(x + yi)(u + vi) = (xu yv) + (xv + yu)i.
Now, if two complex numbers are equal, then their real parts have to be equal and their imaginary parts have
to be equal. In order that zw = 1, well need
(xu yv) + (xv + yu)i = 1.
That gives us two equations. The first says that the real parts are equal:
xu yv = 1,
and the second says that the imaginary parts are equal:
xv + yu = 0.
Now, in our case, z was given and w was unknown, so in these two equations x and y are given, and u and v
are the unknowns to solve for. You can fairly easily solve for u and v in this pair of simultaneous linear
equations. When you do, youll find

So, the reciprocal of z = x + yi is the number w = u + vi where u and v have the values just found. In
summary, we have the following reciprocation formula:

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: reciprocals, conjugates, and division

2 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/div.html

Reciprocals done geometrically, and complex conjugates.


From what we know about the geometry of multiplication, we can determine reciprocals geometrically. If z
and w are reciprocals, then zw = 1, so the product of their
absolute values is 1, and the sum of their arguments (angles) is
0.
This means the length of 1/z is the reciprocal of the length of z.
For example, if |z| = 2, as in the diagram, then |1/z| = 1/2. It also
means the argument for 1/z is the negation of that for z. In the
diagram, arg(z) is about 65 while arg(1/z) is about 65.
You can see in the diagram another point labelled with a bar
over z. That is called the complex conjugate of z. It has the
same real component x, but the imaginary component is
negated. Complex conjugation negates the imaginary
component, so as a transformation of the plane C all points are
reflected in the real axis (that is, points above and below the
real axis are exchanged). Of course, points on the real axis
dont change because the complex conjugate of a real number is
itself.
Complex conjugates give us another way to interpret
reciprocals. You can easily check that a complex number
z = x + yi times its conjugate x yi is the square of its absolute
value |z|2.

Therefore, 1/z is the conjugate of z divided by the square of its absolute value |z|2.

In the figure, you can see that 1/|z| and the conjugate of z lie on the same ray from 0, but 1/|z| is only
one-fourth the length of the conjugate of z (and |z|2 is 4).
Incidentally, complex conjugation is an amazingly transparent operation. It commutes with all the
arithmetic operations: the conjugate of the sum, difference, product, or quotient is the sum, difference,
product, or quotient, respectively, of the conjugates. Such an operation is called a field isomorphism.

Division.

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: reciprocals, conjugates, and division

3 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/div.html

Putting together our information about products and reciprocals, we can find formulas for the quotient of one
complex number divided by another. First, we have a strictly algebraic formula in terms of real and imaginary
parts.

Next, we have an expression in complex variables that uses complex conjugation and division by a real
number.

Both formulations are useful and well worth knowing and understanding.

On to Powers and roots

Back to Multiplication
1999
David E. Joyce

Daves Short Course on Complex Numbers is located


at http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science


Clark University
Worcester, MA 01610

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: powers and roots

1 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/powers.html

Powers of complex numbers are just special cases of products when the power is a positive whole number.
We have already studied the powers of the imaginary unit i and found they cycle in a period of length 4.

and so forth. The reasons were that (1) the absolute value |i| of i was one, so all its powers also have absolute
value 1 and, therefore, lie on the unit circle, and (2) the argument arg(i) of i was 90, so its nth power will
have argument n90, and those angles will repeat in a period of length 4 since 490 = 360, a full circle.
More generally, you can find zn as the complex number (1)
whose absolute value is |z|n, the nth power of the absolute
value of z, and (2) whose argument is n times the argument
of z.
In the figure you see a complex number z whose absolute
value is about the sixth root of 1/2, that is, |z| = 0.89, and
whose argument is 30. Here, the unit circle is shaded black
while outside the unit circle is gray, so z is in the black
region. Since |z| is less than one, its square is at 60 and
closer to 0. Each higher power is 30 further along and even
closer to 0. The first six powers are displayed, as you can
see, as points on a spiral. This spiral is called a geometric or
exponential sprial.

Roots.
Note that in the last example, z6 is on the negative real axis at about -1/2. That means that z is just about equal
to one of the sixth roots of -1/2.

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Complex numbers: powers and roots

2 of 3

http://www.clarku.edu/~djoyce/complex/powers.html

There are, in fact, six sixth roots of any complex number. Let w be a complex number, and z any of its sixth
roots. Since z6 = w, it follows that
1. the absolute value of w, |w| is |z|6, so |z| = |w|1/6, and
2. 6 arg(z) is arg(w), so arg(z)=arg(w)/6.
Actually, the second statement isnt quite right since 6 arg(z) could be any multiple of 360 more than arg(w),
so you can add multiples of 60 to arg(w) to get the other five roots.
For example, take w to be -1/2, the green dot in the figure to the right. Then
|w| is 1/2, and arg(w) is 180. Let z be a sixth root of w. Then (1) |z| is |w|1/6
which is about 0.89. Also, (2) the argument of w is arg(w) = 180. But the
same angle could be named by any of
180, 540, 900, 1260, 1610, or 1970.
If we take 1/6 of each of these angles, then well have the possible arguments
for z:
30, 90, 150, 210, 270, or 330.
Since each of the angles for z differs by 360, therefore each of the possible angles for z will differ by 60.
These six sixth roots of -1/2 are displayed in the figure as blue dots.

More roots of unity.


Recall that an nth root of unity is just another name for an nth root of one. The fourth roots are 1, i, as
noted earlier in the section on absolute value. We also saw that the eight 8th roots of unity when we looked at
multiplication were 1, i, and 2/2 i2/2.
Lets consider now the sixth roots of unity. They will be placed around
the circle at 60 intervals. Two of them, of course, are 1. Let w be the
one with argument 60. The triangle with vertices at 0, 1, and w is an
equilateral triangle, so it is easy to determine the coordinates of w. The
x-coordinate is 1/2, and the y-coordinate is 3/2. Therefore, w is
(1 + i3)/2. The remaining sixth roots are reflections of w in the real and
imaginary axes. In summary, the six sixth roots of unity are 1, and
(1 i3)/2 (where + and can be taken in any order).
Now some of these sixth roots are lower roots of unity as well. The
number 1 is a square root of unity, (1 i3)/2 are cube roots of unity,
and 1 itself counts as a cube root, a square root, and a first root
(anything is a first root of itself). But the remaining two sixth roots, namely, (1 i3)/2, are sixth roots, but
not any lower roots of unity. Such roots are called primitive, so (1 i3)/2 are the two primitive sixth roots of
unity.
Its fun to find roots of unity, but weve found most of the easy ones already.

22/03/2015 05:40 PM

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen