Calculators and Complex Numbers: Index

I’m using the Twelve Days of Christmas (and perhaps a few extra days besides) to do something that I should have done a long time ago: collect past series of posts into a single, easy-to-reference post. The following posts formed my series on how the trigonometric form of complex numbers, DeMoivre’s Theorem, and extending the definitions of exponentiation and logarithm to complex numbers.

Part 1: Introduction: using a calculator to find surprising answers for $\ln(-5)$ and $\sqrt[3]{-8}$ . See the video below.

Part 2: The trigonometric form of complex numbers.

Part 3: Proving the theorem

$\left[ r_1 (\cos \theta_1 + i \sin \theta_1) \right] \cdot \left[ r_2 (\cos \theta_2 + i \sin \theta_2) \right] = r_1 r_2 (\cos [\theta_1+\theta_2] + i \sin [\theta_1+\theta_2])$

Part 4: Proving the theorem

$\displaystyle \frac{ r_1 (\cos \theta_1 + i \sin \theta_1) }{ r_2 (\cos \theta_2 + i \sin \theta_2) } = \displaystyle \frac{r_1}{r_2} (\cos [\theta_1-\theta_2] + i \sin [\theta_1-\theta_2])$

Part 5: Application: numerical example of De Moivre’s Theorem.

Part 6: Proof of De Moivre’s Theorem for nonnegative exponents.

Part 7: Proof of De Moivre’s Theorem for negative exponents.

Part 8: Finding the three cube roots of -27 without De Moivre’s Theorem.

Part 9: Finding the three cube roots of -27 with De Moivre’s Theorem.

Part 10: Pedagogical thoughts on De Moivre’s Theorem.

Part 11: Defining $z^q$ for rational numbers $q$ .

Part 12: The Laws of Exponents for complex bases but rational exponents.

Part 13: Defining $e^z$ for complex numbers $z$

Part 14: Informal justification of the formula $e^z e^w = e^{z+w}$ .

Part 15: Simplification of $e^{i \theta}$ .

Part 16: Remembering DeMoivre’s Theorem using the notation $e^{i \theta}$ .

Part 17: Formal proof of the formula $e^z e^w = e^{z+w}$ .

Part 18: Practical computation of $e^z$ for complex $z$ .

Part 19: Solving equations of the form $e^z = w$ , where $z$ and $w$ may be complex.

Part 20: Defining $\log z$ for complex $z$ .

Part 21: The Laws of Logarithms for complex numbers.

Part 22: Defining $z^w$ for complex $z$ and $w$ .

Part 23: The Laws of Exponents for complex bases and exponents.

Part 24: The Laws of Exponents for complex bases and exponents.

Inverse Functions: Logarithms and Complex Numbers (Part 30)

Ordinarily, there are no great difficulties with logarithms as we’ve seen with the inverse trigonometric functions. That’s because the graph of $y = a^x$ satisfies the horizontal line test for any $0 < a < 1$ or $a > 1$ . For example,

$e^x = 5 \Longrightarrow x = \ln 5$ ,

and we don’t have to worry about “other” solutions.

However, this goes out the window if we consider logarithms with complex numbers. Recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

where $r = |z| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2}$ and $\tan \theta = b/a$ , with $\theta$ in the appropriate quadrant. This is analogous to converting from rectangular coordinates to polar coordinates.

Over the past few posts, we developed the following theorem for computing $e^z$ in the case that $z$ is a complex number.

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

Of course, this looks like what the definition ought to be if one formally applies the Laws of Logarithms to $r e^{i \theta}$ . However, this complex logarithm doesn’t always work the way you’d think it work. For example,

$\log \left(e^{2 \pi i} \right) = \log (\cos 2\pi + i \sin 2\pi) = \log 1 = \ln 1 = 0 \ne 2\pi i$ .

This is analogous to another situation when an inverse function is defined using a restricted domain, like

$\sqrt{ (-3)^2 } = \sqrt{9} = 3 \ne -3$

$\sin^{-1} (\sin \pi) = \sin^{-1} 0 = 0 \ne \pi$ .

The Laws of Logarithms also may not work when nonpositive numbers are used. For example,

$\log \left[ (-1) \cdot (-1) \right] = \log 1 = 0$ ,

but

$\log(-1) + \log(-1) = \log \left( e^{\pi i} \right) + \log \left( e^{\pi i} \right) = \pi i + \pi i = 2\pi i$ .

green line

This material appeared in my previous series concerning calculators and complex numbers: https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/09/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-21/

Inverse Functions: Rational Exponents (Part 8)

In this series of posts, we have seen that the definition of $\sqrt[n]{x}$ and saw that the definition was a little different depending if $n$ is even or odd:

If $n$ is even, then $y = \sqrt[n]{x}$ means that $x = y^n$ and $y \ge 0$ . In particular, this is impossible (for real $y$ ) if $x < 0$ .
If $n$ is odd, then $y = \sqrt[n]{x}$ means that $x = y^n$ . There is no need to give a caveat on the possible values of $y$ .

Let’s now consider the definition of $x^{m/n}$ , where $m$ and $n$ are positive integers greater than 1. Ideally, we’d like to simply defined

$x^{m/n} = \left[ x^{1/n} \right]^m$

This definition reduces to previous work (like a good MIT freshman), using prior definition for raising to powers that are either integers or reciprocals of integers. Indeed, if $x \ge 0$ , there is absolutely no ambiguity about this definition.

Unfortunately, if $x < 0$ , then a little more care is required. There are four possible cases.

Case 1. $m$ and $n$ are odd. In this case, there is no ambiguity if $x < 0$ is negative. For example,

$(-32)^{3/5} = \left[ (-32)^{1/5} \right]^3 = [-2]^3 = -8$

Case 2: $m$ is even but $n$ is odd. Again, there is no ambiguity if $x< 0$ is negative. For example,

$(-32)^{4/5} = \left[ (-32)^{4/5} \right]^3 = [-2]^4 = 16$

Case 3: $m$ is odd but $n$ is even. In this case, $x^{m/n}$ is undefined if $x < 0$ . For example, we would like $(-16)^{3/2}$ to be equal to $\left[ (-16)^{1/2} \right]^3$ , but ${-16}^{1/2} = \sqrt{-16}$ is undefined (using real numbers).

Case 4. $m$ and $latex $n$ are both even. This is perhaps the most interesting case. For example, how should we evaluate $(-8)^{4/6}$ ?. There are two legitimate choices… which lead to different answers!

Option #1: If we just apply the proposed definition of $x^{m/n}$ , we find that

$(-8)^{2/6} = \left[ (-8)^2 \right]^{1/6} = [64]^{1/6} = 2$

Option #2: We could first reduce $2/6$ to lowest terms:

$(-8)^{2/6} = (-8)^{1/3} = -2$

So… which is it?!?!?!?! The rule that mathematicians have chosen is that simplifying the exponent takes precedence over the above definition. In other words, the definition $x^{m/n} = \left[ x^{1/n} \right]^m$ should only be applied in $m/n$ has been reduced to lowest terms in order to remove the above ambiguity.

For the sake of completeness, I note that the above discussion restricts our attention to real numbers. If complex numbers are permitted, then things become a lot more interesting. If we repeat a few of the above calculations using complex numbers, we get answers that are different!

The explanation for this surprising result is not brief, but I discussed it in a previous series of posts:

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/19/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-1/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/20/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-2/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/21/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-3/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/22/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-4/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/23/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-5/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/24/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-6/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/25/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-7/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/26/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-8/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/27/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-9/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/28/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-10/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/29/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-11/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/06/30/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-12/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/01/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-13/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/02/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-14/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/03/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-15-2/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/04/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-16/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/05/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-17/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/06/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-18/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/07/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-19/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/08/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-20/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/09/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-21/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/10/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-22/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/11/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-23/

https://meangreenmath.com/2014/07/12/calculators-and-complex-numbers-part-24/

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 24)

In this series of posts, I explore properties of complex numbers that explain some surprising answers to exponential and logarithmic problems using a calculator (see video at the bottom of this post). These posts form the basis for a sequence of lectures given to my future secondary teachers.

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

where $r = |z| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2}$ and $\tan \theta = b/a$ , with $\theta$ in the appropriate quadrant. As noted before, this is analogous to converting from rectangular coordinates to polar coordinates.

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

Definition. Let $z$ and $w$ be complex numbers so that $z \ne 0$ . Then we define

$z^w = e^{w \log z}$

Technical point: for the latter two definitions, these are the principal values of the functions. In complex analysis, these are usually considered multiply-defined functions. But I’m not going to worry about this technicality here and will only consider the principal values.

This is the last post in this series, where I state some generalizations of the Laws of Exponents for complex numbers.

In yesterday’s post, we saw that $z^{w_1} z^{w_2} = z^{w_1 + w_2}$ as long as $z \ne 0$ . This prevents something like $0^4 \cdot 0^{-3} = 0^1$ , since $0^{-3}$ is undefined.

Theorem. Let $z \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 0 \}$ , $w \in \mathbb{C}$ , and $n \in \mathbb{Z}$ . Then $(z^w)^n = z^{wn}$ .

As we saw in a previous post, the conclusion could be incorrect outside of the above hypothesis, as $\displaystyle \left[ (-1)^3 \right]^{1/2} \ne (-1)^{3/2}$ .

Theorem. Let $u \in \mathbb{R}$ and $z \in \mathbb{C}$ . Then $(e^u)^z = e^{uz}$ .

Theorem. Let $x, y > 0$ be real numbers and $z \in \mathbb{C}$ . Then $x^z y^z = (xy)^z$ .

Again, the conclusion of the above theorem could be incorrect outside of these hypothesis, as $(-2)^{1/2} (-3)^{1/2} \ne \left[ (-2) \cdot (-3) \right]^{1/2}$ .

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 23)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

Definition. Let $z$ and $w$ be complex numbers so that $z \ne 0$ . Then we define

$z^w = e^{w \log z}$

In the remaining posts in this series, I want to explore which properties of exponential functions remain true when complex numbers are used.

To begin, if $w$ is a real rational number, then there is an alternative definition of $z^w$ that matches De Moivre’s Theorem. Happily, the two definitions agree. Suppose that $z = r e^{i \theta}$ with $-\pi < \theta \le \pi$ . Then

$z^w = e^{w \log z}$

$= e^{w [\ln r + i \theta]}$

$= e^{w \ln r + i w \theta}$

$= e^{w \ln r} e^{i w \theta}$

$= r^w (\cos w\theta + i \sin \theta)$

Next, one of the Laws of Exponents remains true even for complex numbers:

$z^{w_1} z^{w_2} = e^{w_1 \log z} e^{w_2 \log z}$

$= e^{w_1 \log z + w_2 \log z}$

$= e^{(w_1 + w_2) \log z}$

$= z^{w_1 + w_2}$ .

However, in previous posts, we’ve seen that the rules $(x^y)^z = x^(yz)$ and $x^z y^z = (xy)^z$ may not be true if nonpositive bases, let alone complex bases, are used.

We can also derive the usual rules $z^0 = 1$ and $z^{-w} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{z^w}$ . First,

$z^0 = e^{0 \log z} = e^0 = 1$ .

Next, we think like an MIT freshman and use the above Law of Exponents to observe that

$z^w z^{-w} = z^{w-w} = z^0 = 1$ .

Dividing, we see that $z^{-w} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{z^w}$ .

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 22)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

At long last, we are now in position to explain the last surprising results from the calculator video below.

Definition. Suppose that $z$ and $w$ are complex numbers so that $z \ne 0$ . Then we define

$z^w = e^{w \log z}$

Naturally, this definition makes sense if $z$ and $w$ are real numbers.

For example, let’s consider the computation of $i^i$ . For the base of $i$ , we note that

$\log i = \log e^{\pi i/ 2} = \displaystyle \frac{\pi i}{2}$ .

Therefore,

$i^i = e^{i \log i} = e^{i \pi i/2} = e^{-\pi/2}$ ,

which is (surprisingly) a real number.

As a second example, let’s compute $(-8)^i$ . To begin,

$\log(-8) = \log \left( 8 e^{\pi i} \right) = \ln 8 + \pi i$ .

Therefore,

$(-8)^i = e^{i \log(-8)}$

$= e^{i (\ln 8 + \pi i)}$

$= e^{-\pi + i \ln 8}$

$= e^{-\pi} (\cos [\ln 8] + i \sin [ \ln 8 ] )$

$= e^{-\pi} \cos (\ln 8) + i e^{-\pi} \sin (\ln 8)$

In other words, a problem like this is a Precalculus teacher’s dream come true, as it contains $e, \ln, \pi, \cos, \sin$ , and $i$ in a single problem.

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 21)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Over the past few posts, we developed the following theorem for computing $e^z$ in the case that $z$ is a complex number.

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

$\log \left(e^{2 \pi i} \right) = \log (\cos 2\pi + i \sin 2\pi) = \log 1 = \ln 1 = 0 \ne 2\pi i$ .

This is analogous to another situation when an inverse function is defined using a restricted domain, like

$\sqrt{ (-3)^2 } = \sqrt{9} = 3 \ne -3$

$\sin^{-1} (\sin \pi) = \sin^{-1} 0 = 0 \ne \pi$ .

The Laws of Logarithms also may not work when nonpositive numbers are used. For example,

$\log \left[ (-1) \cdot (-1) \right] = \log 1 = 0$ ,

but

$\log(-1) + \log(-1) = \log \left( e^{\pi i} \right) + \log \left( e^{\pi i} \right) = \pi i + \pi i = 2\pi i$ .

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 20)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Over the past few posts, we developed the following theorem for computing $e^z$ in the case that $z$ is a complex number.

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

As a consequence, there are infinitely many complex solutions of the equation

$e^z = -2 - 2i$ ,

namely, $z = \ln 2\sqrt{2} - \displaystyle \frac{3\pi}{4} + 2 \pi n i$ .

Choosing the solution that has an imaginary part in the interval $(-\pi,\pi]$ leads to the definition of the complex logarithm.

Definition. Let $z = r e^{i \theta}$ be a complex number so that $-\pi < \theta \le \theta$ . Then we define

$\log z = \ln r + i \theta$ .

Of course, this looks like what the definition ought to be if one formally applies the Laws of Logarithms to $r e^{i \theta}$ . So, for example,

$\log (-2-2i) = \ln 2\sqrt{2} - \displaystyle \frac{3\pi}{4}$

A technicality: this is the principal value of the complex logarithm. In complex analysis, this is technically thought of as a multiply-defined function.

The complex version of the natural logarithm function matches the ordinary definition when applied to real numbers. For example,

$\log 6 = \log \left( 6 e^{0i} \right) = \ln 6 + 0 i = \ln 6$ .

A couple of observations. In high school, the symbol $\log$ is usually dedicated to base 10. However, in higher-level mathematics courses, $\log$ always means natural logarithm. That’s because, for the purposes of abstract mathematics, base-10 logarithms are practically useless. They are helpful for us people since our number system uses base 10; it’s easy for me to estimate $\log_{10} 9000$ , but $\ln 9000$ requires a little more thought. But nearly all major theorems that involve logarithms specifically employ natural logarithms. Indeed, when I first become a professor, I had to remind myself that my students used $\ln$ for natural logarithms and not $\log$ . Still, I write $\log_{10}$ for base-10 logarithms and not $\log$ as a silent acknowledgment of the use of the symbol in higher-level courses.

This use of the logarithm explains the final results of the calculator in the video below. When $\ln(-5)$ is entered, it assumes that a real answer is expected, and so the calculatore returns an error message. On the other hand, when $\ln(-5+0i)$ is entered, it assumes that the user wants the principal complex logarithm. Since $-5+0i = 5 e^{i \pi}$ , the calculator correctly returns $\ln 5 + \pi i$ as the answer. (Of course, the calculator still uses $\ln$ and not $\log$ to mean natural logarithm.)

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 19)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Over the past few posts, we developed the following theorem for computing $e^z$ in the case that $z$ is a complex number.

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

Example. Find all complex numbers $z$ so that $e^z = 5$ .

Solution. If $z = x + iy$ , then

$e^x (\cos y + i \sin y) = 5 (\cos 0 + i \sin 0)$

Matching parts, we see that $e^x = 5$ and that the angle $y$ must be coterminal with $0$ radians. In other words,

$x = \ln 5 \qquad$ and $\qquad y = 2\pi n$ for any integer $n$ .

Therefore, there are infinitely many answers: $z = \ln 5 + 2 \pi n i$ .

Notice that there’s nothing particularly special about the number $5$ . This could have been any nonzero number, including complex numbers, and there still would have been an infinite number of solutions. (This is completely analogous to solving a trigonometric equation like $\sin \theta = 1$ , which similarly has an infinite number of solutions.) For example, the complex solutions of the equation

$e^z = -2 - 2i$

are $z = \ln 2\sqrt{2} - \displaystyle \frac{3\pi}{4} + 2 \pi n i$ .

These observations lead to the following theorems, which I’ll state without proof.

Theorem. The range of the function $f(z) = e^z$ is $\mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 0 \}$ .

Theorem. $e^z = e^w \Longleftrightarrow z = w + 2\pi n i$ .

Naturally, these conclusions are different than the normal case when $z$ is assumed to be a real number.

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.

Calculators and complex numbers (Part 18)

To begin, we recall that the trigonometric form of a complex number $z = a+bi$ is

$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta) = r e^{i \theta}$

Definition. If $z$ is a complex number, then we define

$e^z = \displaystyle \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{z^n}{n!}$

This of course matches the Taylor expansion of $e^x$ for real numbers $x$ .

In the last few posts, we proved the following theorem.

Theorem. If $z$ and $w$ are complex numbers, then $e^z e^w = e^{z+w}$.

This theorem allows us to compute $e^z$ without directly plugging into the above infinite series.

Theorem. If $z = x + i y$ , where $x$ and $y$ are real numbers, then

$e^z = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$

Proof. With the machinery that’s been developed over the past few posts, this one is actually a one-liner:

$e^z = e^{x+iy} = e^x e^{iy} = e^x (\cos y + i \sin y)$ .

For example,

$e^{4+\pi i} = e^4 (\cos \pi + i \sin \pi) = -e^4$

Notice that, with complex numbers, it’s perfectly possible to take $e$ to a power and get a negative number. Obviously, this is impossible when using only real numbers.

Another example:

$e^{-2+3i} = e^{-2} (\cos 3 +i \sin 3)$

In this answer, we have to remember that the angle is 3 radians and not 3 degrees.

green line

For completeness, here’s the movie that I use to engage my students when I begin this sequence of lectures.