Chapter 04
Chapter 04
Chapter 04
Complex Numbers, C
As mentioned earlier, the complex numbers arose in studying the roots of equations.
We saw that for many early mathematicians the quadratic formula
√
−b ± b2 − 4ac
x=
2a
for the quadratic equation ax2 + bx + c = 0 generated “meaningless” solutions when
the discriminant b2 − 4ac was negative.
When Cardano published his tome Ars magna in 1545 he published the more
general solutions to the cubic and quartic equations, crediting Tartaglia with the idea
for the solution of the cubic and Ferrari with the solution of the quartic.
We saw earlier that these formulæ generated some very odd expressions for even
the simplest of solutions that involve the square roots of negative numbers. It was
Bombelli who named these quantities imaginary numbers, yet he and others used
the rules of arithmetic with these “imaginary” numbers to solve other problems.
Euler used complex numbers extensively in number theory in the 1700’s and Cauchy
developed (discovered) an extensive theory of functions of a complex variable in the
1800’s.
It wasn’t until mathematicians found a geometric representation as points in the
complex plane that these numbers began to become more utilized. This was developed
by Wessel in 1799 and Argand in 1806. Gauss used this concept in the 1830’s to prove
the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra. Augustus F. Möbius, a student of Gauss, used
the complex plane and complex functions to classify geometric transformations of the
plane. Later Riemann developed a calculus of complex functions from a geometric
viewpoint and applied these functions to geometry and number theory.
49
50 CHAPTER 4. COMPLEX NUMBERS, C
of algebra and ¡√
treating
¢2 the expressions as if they were binomials with the additional
property that −1 = −1, they were able to obtain reasonable results. These
earlier mathematicians would treat addition as binomial addition:
√ √ √ √
(2 + 4 −1) + (3 − 2 −1) = (2 + 3) + (4 − 2) −1 = 5 + 2 −1
Now, we can identify the complex number (x, 0) with the real number x because
addition and multiplication of numbers of this form give us the usual addition and
multiplication of real numbers. By identifying each real number x with the complex
number (x, 0) and defining complex addition and multiplication as above, we find that
z = x + iy is then the complex number sum of the real number x and the number iy.
If z = x + iy = (x, y) the real number x is called the real part of z and is denoted
by Re(z), while the real number y is called the imaginary part of z and is denoted
by Im(z).
We have seen that the real numbers can be identified as the set of points of the
form (x, 0), so the real number line corresponds to the horizontal axis in the complex
plane and is usually called the real axis. The vertical axis is called the imaginary
axis.
For the complex number z = x + iy, the complex conjugate z̄ is defined to be
z̄ = x − iy. Note that geometrically this is just reflection through the real axis.
For real numbers, we use the notation |x| to denote the distance from the point
x on the real line and the origin. Likewise, we use |z| to denote
p the distance from z
to the origin in the plane. Of course that means that |z| = x2 + y 2 and is called
the modulus or absolute value of z. Note that |z|2 = z · z̄. (Why?) The set U of
complex numbers so that |z| = 1 is the unit circle in the plane.
a) x2 + 4x − 5 40
2
b) x + 4x 30
2
c) x + 4x + 4 20
d) x2 + 4x + 8 10
e) x2 + 4x + 13
–10 –8 –6 –4 –2 0 2 4 6
x
–10
As the constant changes from −5 to 13, the graph of the parabola moves up the
y-axis and the parabola goes from intersecting the x-axis twice to just once to no
intersections at all. We recall that this means that the real roots go from two to one
to none.
But now what happens in the complex plane to the location of the roots. If the
roots are real, then the must lie on the real axis. Thus the roots to the first three
parabolas all lie on the real axis. From that point on the roots lie above and below
½ √ ¾
−4 ± 16 − 4c √ 2
S= = {−2 ± 4 − c}.
2 1
reiθ .
The reasons for looking at these different representations is that oftentimes one
property of a number system can be more easily understood in one coordinate system
and not in another. We often play these coordinate systems “against each other” to
better understand what we are studying.
Lemma 4.1 The distance between z1 and z2 in the complex plane is |z1 − z2 |.
Note that this is entirely analogous to the situation in the real line. The distance
between two real numbers a and b is |a − b|. In the reals the equation |x − a| = b is
the set of points x which are at a distance b from a. The same will be true in the
complex plane. If r is a positive real number, the equation |z − z0 | = r is the set of
complex numbers that are at a distance r from z.
z1 z2 = (x1 x2 − y1 y2 ) + i(x1 y2 + x2 y1 ).
z z̄ = x2 + y 2 = |z|2 ,
as we noted before.
This identity is what we use to define the quotient of two complex numbers: if
z2 6= 0, then
z1 z1 z̄2 z1 z̄2 (x1 x2 − y1 y2 ) + i(x1 y2 + x2 y1 )
= = = .
z2 z2 z̄2 |z2 |2 x22 + y22
While this is algebraically satisfying and elegant, it does nothing for us geometri-
cally. Neither z1 z2 nor z1 /z2 have any immediate geometric meaning — well, at least
not while in rectangular form. What happens if we write them in polar form?
If z1 = r1 (cos θ1 + i sin θ1 ) and z2 = r2 (cos θ2 + i sin θ2 ) then
z1 z2 = (x1 x2 − y1 y2 ) + i(x1 y2 + x2 y1 )
= r1 r2 [(cos θ1 cos θ2 − sin θ1 sin θ2 ) + i(cos θ1 sin θ2 + cos θ2 sin θ1 )]
= r1 r2 (cos(θ1 + θ2 ) + i sin(θ1 + θ2 ))
Also,
z1 (x1 x2 − y1 y2 ) + i(x1 y2 + x2 y1 )
=
z2 x22 + y22
r1
= [(cos θ1 cos θ2 + sin θ1 sin θ2 ) + i(cos θ1 sin θ2 − cos θ2 sin θ1 )]
r2
r1
= (cos(θ1 − θ2 ) + i sin(θ1 − θ2 ))
r2
Thus, to multiply two complex numbers together when given in polar form, mul-
tiply their moduli together and add their arguments and to divide them, divide their
moduli and subtract their arguments.
Now, if you put them into polar coordinates, it becomes even nicer.
Lemma 4.3 Let z1 = [r1 , θ1 ] and z2 = [r2 , θ2 ]. Then
z1 z2 = [r1 , r2 , θ1 + θ2 ]
and · ¸
z1 r1
= , θ1 − θ 2 .
z2 r2
Note then that multiplication by a positive real number multiplies the modulus by
that real number and does not rotate the complex number at all — rotation through
0 radians. Multiplication by i sends x + iy to ix − y or rotates the complex number
through π/2 radians.
4.6 Powers in C
In polar coordinates we have that [r, θ]2 = [r2 , 2θ]. So, by induction we can prove the
following.
Lemma 4.4 For a complex number z = [r, θ], z n = [r, θ]n = [rn , nθ].
Corollary 4.2 In polar form if z = r(cos θ + i sin θ), then
z n = rn (cos(nθ) + i sin)nθ).
Definition 4.2 Suppose that z is a complex number. The set
O(z) = {z n | n ∈ N}
of all positive integer powers of z is called the orbit of z.
Example 4.1 For z = i, we have i2 = −1, i3 = −i and i4 = 1, thus the orbit of i is
the set O(i) = {i, −1, −i, 1}.
If |z| > 1, then the orbit must contain complex numbers with larger and larger
moduli. If |z| < 1, then the orbit will contain complex numbers with smaller and
smaller moduli, approaching 0.
1. If n is even and
√ a > 0, then a has two real nth roots, one that √
is positive and
is denoted by n a or a1/n and the other negative, denoted by − n a or −a1/n .
nates:
√ 3π
|a| = 2 and Arg(a) = − . –1 –0.5 0.5 1
4
That means that we need to find all complex numbers
z = [r, θ] so that –0.5
√ 3π
[r, θ]5 = [r5 , 5θ] = a = [ 2, − ]. –1
4
√ √
Thus, we have that r5 = 2 or r = 10 2 and 5θ = − 3π 4
or θ = − 3π . So,
20 · ¸
√
10 3π
[r, θ] = 2, − .
20
Recall that each complex number has an infinite number of polar coordinates, so
we
√ will also look at those representations of a. Those with r > 0 are given by
[ 2, − 3π + 2kπ], where k is any integer. Note that the modulus does not change, so
4 √
all of the fifth roots will have first polar coordinate the same: 10 2. The arguments
are different so when we solve
3π
5θ = − + 2kπ,
4
we get
3π 2πk
θ=− + .
20 5
√
Therefore each zk = [ 10 2, − 3π
20
+ 2πk
5
] is a fifth root of a = −1 − i. Now, the nice part
is that sine and cosine are functions that are periodic with period 2π, so we only need
worry about k = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and the five roots are:
½· ¸ · ¸ · ¸ · ¸¾
√
10 3π h 10√ π i 10 √ 13π √ 21π
10
√ 29π
10
2, − , 2, , 2, , 2, , 2,
20 4 20 20 20
Notice that when we graph these roots they form the vertices of a regular pentagon.
Theorem 4.1 (DeMoivre’s Theorem) For every natural number n > 1, every
nonzero complex number z has exactly n distinct complex nth roots:
µ µ ¶ µ ¶¶
pn Arg(z) + 2πk Arg(z) + 2πk
zk = |z| cos + i sin ,
n n
for k = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1.
The points in the p complex plane are the vertices of a regular n-gon inscribed in
the circle of radius |z| centered at the origin in the complex plane.
n
for any positive integer k. Thus, the set of nth roots of unity can be written as