Express z1+z2 in mod-art form if z1=1+(Squareroot3)i and z2=(Squareroot3)+i This is probably really basic but I just started complex numbers this week
Thanks!! I just don't understand what you mean about the constant not affecting (1+i) ?
Yes that is what I have been getting however the answer isn't that, the last 2 posts have the right answer.Hey! I just started complex numbers this week as well!
Thanks!! I just don't understand what you mean about the constant not affecting (1+i) ?
Hey! I just started complex numbers this week as well! I might be wrong, but I'll give it a try.
Yes that is what I have been getting however the answer isn't that, the last 2 posts have the right answer.
Ohhh is that why you only did pythagorus on (1+i) becuase the positive number in front of it scales it's length ?
I have to ruin the fun.
I have to ruin the fun.
I guess both moduli are equally correct? Is one more simple than the other?
You should find the simplified expression for both z1+z1 and z1-z2, then multiply both numerator and denominator by the conjugate of the denominator.Now I have to divide (z1+z2) by (z1-z2) I think it would be easier to complete this question using the more simplified mod-arg
No wouldnt I just divide the modulis and take away the arguement in the denominator from the argument in the numeratorYou should find the simplified expression for both z1+z1 and z1-z2, then multiply both numerator and denominator by the conjugate of the denominator.
Yes, you could do it that way if you were using polar form ( rcis(theta)). Preferably, I would just do what mentioned, because z1-z2 and z1+z2 have 'weird' real and imaginary parts, that probably wouldn't give a 'neat' value for their respective arguments when taking the inverse tan. (I haven't tried yet so their arguments might be simple)No wouldnt I just divide the modulis and take away the arguement in the denominator from the argument in the numerator
We learnt that shortcut today
I just tried to do z1-z2 however the argument was 3pi/4 why is it this when I calculated the tan inverse to be -45!!! Shouldn't the answers argument be -pi/4!!!!????Yes, you could do it that way if you were using polar form ( rcis(theta)). Preferably, I would just do what mentioned, because z1-z2 and z1+z2 have 'weird' real and imaginary parts, that probably wouldn't give a 'neat' value for their respective arguments when taking the inverse tan. (I haven't tried yet so their arguments might be simple)
edit: ah nvm I just looked at the above posts and the argument for z1+z2 is just pi/4 so z1-z2 would also be similar. Yeah, your way would be quicker
I just tried to do z1-z2 however the argument was 3pi/4 why is it this when I calculated the tan inverse to be -45!!! Shouldn't the answers argument be -pi/4!!!!????
The argument is 3pi/4.I just tried to do z1-z2 however the argument was 3pi/4 why is it this when I calculated the tan inverse to be -45!!! Shouldn't the answers argument be -pi/4!!!!????