How Do You Correctly Multiply Complex Numbers to Verify Roots?

In summary, the conversation was about evaluating the x^2 term of a quadratic equation using two different methods. The first method involved substituting a value for i^2 and then distributing, while the second method involved using the multiplication definition of complex numbers. However, there were mistakes in both calculations and it was pointed out that the coefficient of i should not include i in the second method. After making corrections, the correct answer was obtained.
  • #1
Square1
143
1
I have solved the roots of a quadratic equation and want to "test" them by putting them back in for x. I am having a problem with the x^2 term. Of the two roots, I'm only trying so far the positive square root case. I am trying to avoid writing all my work out since that would be hell and I also think would not be easy to read.

To evaluate x^2 where x = -2/3 + i√19, I first try the "from the ground up" method of just distributing, and eventually make a substitution of -1 for i^2. After making that substitution, I end up subtracting the term that had the i^2, from (9/4). After simplifying, I have (-5/2) + (-3i√19)/2

The second way I try to evaluate x^2 term is by using the multiplication definition of complex numbers (a + bi)(c + di) = (ac - bd) + (bc + ad)i . I find that (ac - bd) results in (9/4) - (19i^2)/4 and when I change i^2 to -1, now the terms are being added! Then when I add the (bc + ad)i part, I finally end up with (14/2) + (-3i√19)/2 .

Could someone point out the mistake here then? :S
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I am new to complex numbers so don't assume anything with me. I read somewhere on wiki that it is sometimes relevant for a +bi when b is negative to keep b itself negative as supposed to write as a - bi ? I don't really remember about it much though, but just throwing it out there.
 
  • #3
Square1 said:
I have solved the roots of a quadratic equation and want to "test" them by putting them back in for x. I am having a problem with the x^2 term. Of the two roots, I'm only trying so far the positive square root case. I am trying to avoid writing all my work out since that would be hell and I also think would not be easy to read.
If we can't see what you did, how can we provide help?
Square1 said:
To evaluate x^2 where x = -2/3 + i√19, I first try the "from the ground up" method of just distributing, and eventually make a substitution of -1 for i^2. After making that substitution, I end up subtracting the term that had the i^2, from (9/4). After simplifying, I have (-5/2) + (-3i√19)/2
This is incorrect. Since you didn't show your work, I have no way to point out where you went wrong.
Square1 said:
The second way I try to evaluate x^2 term is by using the multiplication definition of complex numbers (a + bi)(c + di) = (ac - bd) + (bc + ad)i . I find that (ac - bd) results in (9/4) - (19i^2)/4 and when I change i^2 to -1, now the terms are being added!
You have mistake here, as well, in both calculations.

a = c = -2/3, and b = d = √19. Note that b and d are the coefficients of i. They do not include i.

ac - bd = 4/9 - 19


Square1 said:
Then when I add the (bc + ad)i part, I finally end up with (14/2) + (-3i√19)/2 .

Could someone point out the mistake here then? :S

What do you get for bc + ad? That is the coefficient of i in the product.
 
  • #4
Ok i made some big mistakes in writing this firstly. Yikes. Need to start again...

The roots of x^2 + 3x + 7 are x = -3/2 + (i√19)/2 and x = -3/2 - (i√19)/2

x^2 when x = -3/2 + (i√19)/2
= (-3 + i√19)/(2) x (-3 + i√19)/(2)
= (9/4 - (3i√19)/4 - (3i√19)/4 - 19/4) switching i^2 with -1
=(-10/4 - (6i√19)/4)
=(-5/2 - (3i√19)/2)Now plugging in terms with the definition...
( (9/4 - (19i^2)/4) + ( (-3i√19)/4 - (3i√19)/4 ) )
= ( (9 + 19)/4 + (-6i√19)/4 )
= 28/4 - (6i√19)/4
=14/2 - (3i√19)/4
 
  • #5
Try this: (a+b)^2 = a^2 + 2ab + b^2
((-3/2) + i*SQRT(19)/2)^2 = (-3/2)^2 + 2(3/2)(i*SQRT(19)/2) + (19/4)*i^2)
= 9/4 + (-1)*(19/4) + (3/2)(i*SQRT(19)/2
= (9-19)/4 + (3/4)*SQRT(19)*i
= -5/2 + 3i*SQRT(19)/4

You have to be careful handling - signs and i^2 in the same expression, or you might inadvertently make a mistake.
 
  • #6
OK i think I got it now.
I had the right idea with my distributive method and it brings me to right answer. When it comes to just plugging in the needed values "using the definition", it boiled down to what mark mentioned; that being to exclude i from term b and d.

Thanks
 

FAQ: How Do You Correctly Multiply Complex Numbers to Verify Roots?

What are complex numbers?

Complex numbers are numbers that consist of both a real part and an imaginary part. They are written in the form a + bi, where a is the real part and bi is the imaginary part (with i being the imaginary unit, equal to √-1).

How do you multiply complex numbers?

To multiply complex numbers, you can use the FOIL method, just like multiplying binomials. First, multiply the first terms, then the outer terms, then the inner terms, and finally the last terms. Combine like terms and simplify if necessary.

What is the product of two complex numbers?

The product of two complex numbers is another complex number. It is written in the form (a + bi)(c + di) and can be simplified to ac + (ad + bc)i + bdi2, which becomes ac + (ad + bc)i - bd when simplified using the fact that i2 = -1.

Can complex numbers be divided?

Yes, complex numbers can be divided. To divide complex numbers, you need to rationalize the denominator by multiplying the top and bottom by the complex conjugate of the denominator. Then, follow the same steps as dividing fractions.

Why do we need to multiply complex numbers?

Multiplying complex numbers is an important tool in many areas of mathematics and science, such as engineering, physics, and computer graphics. It allows us to represent and manipulate quantities that involve both real and imaginary components, making calculations and problem-solving more efficient and accurate.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
737
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top