MedVision ad

An elegant proof of Euler's identity! (1 Viewer)

GeorgesBorges

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
38
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Don't ruin it for others and give everyone a go! PM me your answers =)
Any 4U student who knows their work should be able to do this question.... "should" being the key word

 
Last edited:

Iruka

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
544
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Well, it is a nice question, but you have to assume that you can do calculus with complex numbers in the same way that you do calculus with real numbers.
 

lolokay

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
1,015
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
how about:

let y = cosx + isinx

a)show that dy/dx = iy
b)hence show that y = e^ix

does this make the same sort of assumption?
 

Affinity

Active Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,062
Location
Oslo
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2003
same problem.. and you don't even have a definition for e^z where z is complex
 

GeorgesBorges

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
38
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Yup, calculus works in the complex field as well =)
treat "i" as just any algebraic constant.
 

addikaye03

The A-Team
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
1,267
Location
Albury-Wodonga, NSW
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
b) You guys are just doing this right:

e^ix=cosx+isinx for any real number x

e^i(pi)=cos(pi)+isin(pi)

Since cos (pi)=-1, sin(pi)=0

e^i(pi)=-1

e^i(pi)+1=0
 

Iruka

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
544
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Yup, calculus works in the complex field as well =)
treat "i" as just any algebraic constant.
Of course you can do it.

You are saying that good 4u students should be able to do it. My point is that 4u students have no justification for assuming that they can do it.
 

Affinity

Active Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,062
Location
Oslo
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2003
Yup, calculus works in the complex field as well =)
treat "i" as just any algebraic constant.
There's a fundamental flaw to this question.

Remember you don't have a definition for e^z where z is complex. Which means that you will either need an explicit defintion for e^z to define the derivative or you can define exp(z) to be a function such that d/dz exp(z) = exp(z)

The first approach will probably mean defining e^z in terms of a power series, but then one can just check euler's identity by adding the power series.

the second approach will require you to prove that such a function in fact exists and that it agrees with what we know to be e^z when z is real.

Other approaches will require more machinery.


just to illustrate, the function f(x) = exp(-1/x) for x > 0 and 0 when x <= 0 is smooth (infinitely differentiable) when considered over the real numbers. but if you consider it as a complex number function then it has an essential discontinuity at 0
 
Last edited:

dvse

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
206
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
There's a fundamental flaw to this question.

Remember you don't have a definition for e^z where z is complex. Which means that you will either need an explicit defintion for e^z to define the derivative or you can define exp(z) to be a function such that d/dz exp(z) = exp(z)
I think we had a discussion on this somewhere before - the question clearly demonstrates that HSC maths is essentially harmful as the only thing it teaches people is to mindlessly apply rewrite rules to formal expressions without any understanding whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

Joel8945

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
269
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Don't ruin it for others and give everyone a go! PM me your answers =)
Any 4U student who knows their work should be able to do this question.... "should" being the key word


a)


f'(x) = [((-sin(x)+icos(x)) x e^-ix) + ((-ie^-ix)x(cos(x)+sin(x))]

f'(x) = e^-ix[-sin(x)+icos(x)+sin(x)-icos(x)]

f'(x) = e^-ix x 0

f'(x) = 0

therefore f(x) = c, where c is a constant

but if |cos(x) + isin(x)| = 1 and -π x π => |e^-ix| = 1

=> f(x) = c = 1

therefore cos(x) + isin(x) = 1/(e^-ix) = e^ix

QED

b)

e^iπ + 1 = 0

e^iπ = cos(π) + isin(π) = -1 + i*0 = -1

therefore

e^iπ + 1 = LHS

-1 + 1 = LHs

0 = LHS

QED

Fun :haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:
 

Joel8945

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
269
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
a)

but if |cos(x) + isin(x)| = 1 and -π x π => |e^-ix| = 1
ok I should have stated that my assumption is that -π ≤ x ≤ π, because you need that to prove the proof. I have used these and understand the theory so my intuition knew what to expect but really the flaw to this proof is not giving x a restriction of values, but, you don't need to as e^-ix always has a magnitude of 1, but, by arriving at that conclusion you would have to assume that the proof you are proving is true! Unless I haven't looked at this from a different perspective where you can achieve that f(x) = 1 no matter what!
 

Iruka

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
544
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Well, you could try x=0, couldn't you?

But the deeper problems still remain.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top