Why use i, √(-1) not work?

Let me tell you first, I am not stopping you from using √(-1), it is just a symbol, here is just to discuss the properties of some numbers

We first need to discuss a property of the next root form. The following will tell a story about Xiao Ming:

His teacher wrote such a question on the blackboard

a very normal question

a very normal question

His classmate Xiaohong is very smart and got the correct answer right away

A very standard problem-solving procedure

A very standard problem-solving procedure

But looking at Xiao Ming, he seems a little weird

He misunderstood the title first, and finally misunderstood the result. The steps are as follows

Misunderstood the question first

Misunderstood the question first

then count

then count

Finally got the result wrong again

Finally got the result wrong again

Eh? Actually right!

But in fact, this is not an unreasonable accident.

We first set a^2=5, and then calculate (8+a)^2

step

step

And because a^2=5, so there is

I admit that I am very busy, otherwise I would not post this article

I admit that I am very busy, otherwise I would not post this article

At this time, it is obvious that there is no difference whether a=√5 or a=-√5

This is why Xiao Ming was actually right in the end.

But we can't stop, because there is a problem before us:

If they are said to have the same nature in the calculation process, how do we distinguish them?

For ±√5, this problem is particularly easy to solve, because they are real numbers and can be compared

We know that there is such a number 2.23, its square is 4.9729

We also know that there is such a number 2.24, its square is 5.0176

So we get an interval, 2.23<√5<2.24

This interval can be kept small, so we know that √5 is a real number, but it is not easy to express

it is approximately equal to

an approximate value

an approximate value

By analogy, -√5 can also be expressed in this way, after all, it is also a real number

another approximation

another approximation

We found that we can derive an approximation of ±√5, so we can at least distinguish between the two by approximation

At this point we can finally face our problem:

√(-1) Why is this mark unreasonable?

The proof process we have just done is universal for all numbers that open the square root sign, so we can know that ±√(-1) has the same property in the operation process

Here comes the question, how do we distinguish between ±√(-1)?

The method just now cannot be used, because we know that for any real number, its square must be a non-negative number

We can't find such real numbers, and the difference between them and ±√(-1) can be kept small, so we can't find the so-called interval just now, and we can't find the real number approximation

an "approximate value"

an "approximate value"

In other words, for ±√(-1), we cannot distinguish without a new definition

We only know that they are opposite to each other, but because of their special nature, we cannot make a simple distinction between them

Just ±√5 in terms of calculation, even if the two can be exchanged at the same time and the calculation result does not change much, but at least the approximate value has changed

Yes, they are at least slightly different in their approximations to real numbers

Yes, they are at least slightly different in their approximations to real numbers

But in front of ±√(-1), you can't calculate the approximate value. At this time, if you exchange the two at the same time, there is really no difference

At this time, the ± outside the root sign loses its meaning in real numbers

So defining i=√(-1) is not very accurate, because you can define i=-√(-1), and you will find that such a change will not make any difference in the operation

So generally define i like this, i^2=-1

At this time, (-i)^2=-1 is also defaulted

So if we use i, we will be less stingy like the author on the way to learn mathematics

That's why I think √(-1) is not a good notation

At this time, everyone should be able to understand why Descartes deliberately set the imaginary number to i, in order to prevent the occurrence of double precision.

Of course, at this time, you will definitely understand why Descartes set the imaginary number as the letter i

imaginary => imaginary

imaginary number=>imaginary number

Guess you like

Origin blog.csdn.net/leyang0910/article/details/132274227