Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-13-2005, 11:56 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

I'm not sure I can give you a technical reason, but certain mathematical laws or priciples that work for real numbers don't necessarily work for complex numbers.

sqrt(a/b) = sqrt(a) / sqrt(b) is only true for real numbers.

I have a hard enough time even understanding what a complex number actually is. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-13-2005, 11:58 PM
theTourne theTourne is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 23
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

I could certainly be wrong, but I think the only problem is in the final division.

I don't see a problem with:

(-1)(V-E)^(1/2) = (V-E)^(1/2)

To use some concrete numbers, I think we all agree that sqrt(4) = -2

Then,

sqrt(4) = -2
sqrt(4) = (-1)*(2)
sqrt(4) = (-1)*(sqrt(4))

I don't believe you can divide both sides of the equation by a root, because it could be either positive or negative.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-14-2005, 12:00 AM
gumpzilla gumpzilla is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,401
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

Here's another "proof" in this vein that I've always found enjoyable:

x^2 = x + x + . . . x (x copies of x)

Differentiate both sides:

2x = 1 + 1 + 1 . . . = x

Divide by x:

2 = 1.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-14-2005, 01:33 AM
DrPublo DrPublo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 38
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

[ QUOTE ]
So the answer to your question is that you are being inconsistent in how you define sqrt(-1), and if you're consistent in that regard then the problem goes away.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe you, and your answer makes a lot of sense. I've also tried to do the identical "proof" in terms of the generalized complex number r*exp(i*theta) and can't seem to make it work, indicating that my problem lies somewhere with the casual use of i.

One question though. I thought I am using sqrt(-1) = i on both sides of the equation, so wherein lies the inconsistency?

The Doc
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-14-2005, 01:57 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

[ QUOTE ]
You're picking the two different branches, since both i and 1 / i when squared yield -1, but themselves differ by a factor of -1, and this is where the problem comes in. So the answer to your question is that you are being inconsistent in how you define sqrt(-1), and if you're consistent in that regard then the problem goes away. Difficulties of this kind are extremely common when working with complex variables, which is part of what makes them confusing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right. To elaborate a bit (for the benefit of the others), you end up with this sort of thing any time you have a multi-valued function. For example, the function x^2 takes the number 1 to the number 1. It also takes the number -1 to the number 1. Thus the inverse of the function x^2 logically could take 1 to 1 or to -1. You must choose a consistent rule for making sense of this (we always choose the positive value without thinking much about it).

With real numbers, this is easy, and remains consistent once the rule is chosen. With complex numbers, however, this "choice" cannot be consistent over the entire complex plane if you are dealing with a multivalued function -- you need to specify where your choice is valid. If you try, for example, to integrate some multivalued function over some line in the complex plane, you must draw a branch cut line over which your line of integration can not cross. Crossing the branch cut would intuitively mean that part of the time you integrate using one rule, and after crossing the branch cut you use another rule. This is bad, since the choice of where you draw the line is somewhat arbitrary -- all that is important is that it must be drawn somewhere to ensure that things are well-defined.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-14-2005, 02:12 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

[ QUOTE ]
To elaborate a bit (for the benefit of the others)

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. I understand it perfectly now. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-15-2005, 01:26 PM
BruceZ BruceZ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,636
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's another "proof" in this vein that I've always found enjoyable:

x^2 = x + x + . . . x (x copies of x)

Differentiate both sides:

2x = 1 + 1 + 1 . . . = x

Divide by x:

2 = 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good one. The problem here is that

x^2 = x + x + . . . x (x copies of x)

is only true for integer x, and if this function is only defined for integer x, then the function is discreet and is not differentiable.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-16-2005, 11:54 AM
ninjia3x ninjia3x is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 7
Default Re: Ok so I just proved 1 = -1. Someone help me find my error.

[ QUOTE ]
Hi guys. First post in this forum.

Working on a problem set recently, a few friends and I accidentally discovered a proof of -1=1, and for the life of us we can't find out what we did wrong. And it's not like we're math slouches either; we're all graduate students in physical/theoretical chemistry.

From what I understand posting TeX doesn't work on 2+2, so you'll have to follow my algebra.

Start with the identity

(E-V)^(1/2) = (E-V)^(1/2)

Now multiply each side by -1, except on the RHS substitute i^2 for -1 (where i of course is the imaginary number).

(-1)(E-V)^(1/2) = (i^2)(E-V)^(1/2)

Now divide through by i

(-1/i)(E-V)^(1/2) = i*(E-V)^(1/2)

But since i is just the square root of -1, we can subsume it into the square root of E-V

(-1)[(E-V)/-1]^(1/2) = [(-1)(E-V)]^(1/2)

and then rearrange the interior of the square root to find

(-1)(V-E)^(1/2) = (V-E)^(1/2)

or

-1 = 1.

No dividing by zero in this proof either. Where did I make a mistake?

The Doc

[/ QUOTE ]


(-1/i)(E-V)^(1/2) = i*(E-V)^(1/2)

for the (-1/i), times top and bottom by i

you get -i/i^2 = -i/-1 = i

so u have i*(E-V)^(1/2) = i*(E-V)^(1/2)

...pretty obvious mistake u made having root(-1) = -i
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.