COMPLEX NUMBERS AND EULER'S FORMULA

The motivation for introducing complex numbers is that of solving equations that have no
solution otherwise. For instance, the equation
j
2
1 + 0 =
does not have a solution when using "conventional" scalar numbers which can only be positive,
zero or negative. Note that one can try to define j 1 = but such a definition is meaningless
without redefining how the square root function works. Careless use of such definition can lead
to wrong answers in common algebraic manipulations.
Instead of concentrating our efforts in finding a solution to the equation above, we can ask what
use such a solution would have if we "imagine" that it exists.
A possible use of the equation j
2
1 = would be to relate the Taylor series expansion of the
sine, cosine, and exponential functions as follows:
sin ( ) series , 8 ,
1
6

3

1
120

5

1
5040

7
+
cos ( ) series , 8 , 1
1
2

2

1
24

4

1
720

6
+
e

series , 8 , 1 +
1
2

2
+
1
6

3
+
1
24

4
+
1
120

5
+
1
720

6
+
1
5040

7
+
Notice that the magnitude of the coefficients in the series for the exponential function can be
obtained by alternating the magnitude of the coefficients of the series for the cosine and sine
functions. However, the signs do not match. The solution to the previous problem, j
2
1 = , can
become useful in making the signs match. Let us substitute by j in the series for the
exponential function to obtain (after substituting j
2
1 = , j
3
j = , j
4
1 = , j
5
j = , etc.. ) :
e
j
1 j +
1
2

2

1
6

3
j
1
24

4
+
1
120

5
j +
1
720

6

1
5040

7
j =
Comparing the above equation to the series for the sine and cosine terms yield:
e
j
cos ( ) j sin ( ) + = This important equation is called Euler's Formula
Notice that, although we haven't solved the equation j
2
1 = , i.e., we don't know what is j, we
have found an interesting relationship.
When 0 = then a R = and b 0 = , and the "vector" R e
j 0
R 1 = R = lies on the x-axis.
Conversely, when , = /2 then a 0 = and b R = , and the "vector" R e
j

2

R j = lies on the
y-axis. For this reason, the x-axis is labeled after the "conventional" or "real" numbers and the
y-axis is labeled after the new or "imagined" solution.
R e
j
a j b + =
as
R e
j
R cos ( ) j R sin ( ) + =
Then it is possible to express:
b R sin ( ) =
and
a R cos ( ) =
Furthermore, if we let
Note: the magnitude of the blue arrow is R.

R sin
( )

R cos ( )
R e
j

This suggests that the number 1 and the " imagined" solution j are 90 degrees (

2
rad) apart, in
a two dimensional plot we would say that they are mutually perpendicular ! In order to consider
results other than 0 or j, we multiply e
j
by a constant "conventional" number R. It follows that
the "natural" way to represent the entity R e
j
in a graph is:
e
j

2

j =
or
if

2
= , then e
j

2

cos

2
|

\
|
|

j sin

2
|

\
|
|

+ =
e
j 0
1 =
or
if 0 = , then e
j 0
cos 0 ( ) j sin 0 ( ) + = It is also interesting that,
:
a j b + ( ) c j d + ( ) ac b d ( ) j ad b c + ( ) + =
substituting j
2
1 = we obtain
a j b + ( ) c j d + ( ) ac j
2
b d + j a d + j b c + =
Using the original problem j
2
1 = , the product of two complex numbers can be defined as
follows:
When 0 90 , 180 , 90 , degrees, then R e
j
will not be aligned with the coordinates axes and
it becomes a "mixture" of real and imaginary parts,i.e., neither a or b will be zero. Thus, R e
j

is said to be a "complex" number (complex as in "mixed").

< such that atan
b
a
|

\
|
|

= Principal Argument:
Usually one is only interested to use a based on a single rotation. In this
case n is set to n 0 = and the corresponding
0
= atan
b
a
|

\
|
|

= is called the
"principal argument".
n integer =

n
atan
b
a
|

\
|
|

n 2 + =
However, this equation have multiple solutions since tan ( ) tan n 2 + ( ) =
for n being any negative or positive integer. All possible solutions can be
represented by the equation:
b
a
R sin ( )
R cos ( )
= tan ( ) = also,
R a
2
b
2
+ = so
a
2
b
2
+ R cos ( ) ( )
2
R sin ( ) ( )
2
+ = R
2
cos ( )
2
sin ( )
2
+
( )
= R
2
=
Given a and b it is also possible to find R and as follows:
Given the above implications of the equation j
2
1 + 0 = and the way we plot (x,y) points in a
two dimensional graphs we can define the complex number system as follows
a j b + ( ) c j d + ( ) ac b d ( ) j ad b c + ( ) + =
Furthermore , the equation j
2
1 + 0 = allowed us to interpret how to multiply those "complex"
combinations:
Note : the above equations are the exactly the same equations used to go from
rectangular to polar coordinates and viceversa.
<
where the principal argument is being used:
atan
b
a
|

\
|
|

=
and
R a
2
b
2
+ =
implies
a j b + R e
j
=
Conversely,
b R sin ( ) =
and
a R cos ( ) =
implies
R e
j
a j b + =
The angle in the formula led us to consider visualizing the term R e
j
, where R is just a
constant "conventional" number, in a two dimensional plot. The plot suggested that the x-axis
is composed of numbers that are multiples of the number 1, i.e, R 1 , and the y-axis is made
up of numbers that are multiples of the "imagined" solution "j", i.e, R j . If R e
j
did not lie
exactly on either of the axes, then we said the R e
j
is a "mixed" or "complex" combination of
component along the two axes. Those components were obtained from the relationships:
e
j
cos ( ) j sin ( ) + = Euler's Formula
It is important to realize that we never solved the equation j
2
1 + 0 = , i.e., we still don't know
what is j . Instead, we went around the problem and investigated what would be the
implication of such an equation in the sine, cosine, and exponential functions. In the course
of that investigation, we learned that the equation j
2
1 + 0 = can be used to obtain a rather
interesting formula:
------ SUMMARY AND FORMAL DEFINITION OF COMPLEX NUMBERS ------
IMPORTANT NOTE: we never solved the problem j
2
1 = . Instead, an investigation of
the implications of this original problem led us to expand (generalize) our definition of numbers
to include complex numbers . The generalization automatically included the solutions to the
problem x
2
1 = that can be shown to be x j = or x j = by applying the product rule for
complex numbers
c a b j + = becomes c a b , ( ) = then
1 1 0 , ( ) = and j 0 1 , ( ) = define
Shortcut notation:
__________________________
u v + a c + b d + , ( ) =
The addition of two complex numbers u a b , ( ) = and v c d , ( ) = is defined as:
u v ac b d ad b c + , ( ) =
The product of two complex numbers u a b , ( ) = and v c d , ( ) = is defined as:
where a is the abcissa (x-axis) and b is the ordinate (y-axis) and
both a and b are scalars.
c a b , ( ) =
Complex numbers are defined as a set of 2-dimensional numbers plus the
definitions of how to multiply and add two of such numbers. A complex
number can be expressed as any two dimensional vector using x and y
components. Let c be a complex number, then as with any two-dimensional
vector, we can write:
FORMAL DEFINITION OF COMPLEX NUMBERS
__________________________
A common misconception:
A common misconception is the definition of j as j 1 = using the "conventional" definition of
square root.
The problem with this is that it completely ignores the fact that the square root function itself
must be defined for complex numbers.
With "conventional" real numbers the square root function is defined as the positive root of the
argument. For example, x assumes that there exists a "conventional" real number a such
that a
2
x = , and, by definition, x a = where a stands for the absolute value a. This fact
allow us to simplify expressions as x y x y = . However, this latter fact does not readily
apply to complex numbers.
We cannot use this above definition of square root for complex numbers because the absolute
value function is not defined for complex numbers.
Insisting on applying the above definition of square root may result in erroneous results. For
instance, consider (erroneously) defining j 1 = then it follows that
j j 1 1 = 1 ( )
2
= 1 = 1 = which is obviously inconsistent with j
2
1 = .
Another counterexample for this misconception on square roots is as follows
Consider
1
1
1
1
=
Now, taking the square root of both sides of the equation results in:
1
1
1
1
=
or using the definition j 1 = yields:
1
j
j
1
=
rearranging,
j
2
1 =
which is a contradiction with the initial definition j 1 = .
Conclusion: the formal definition for j is j 0 1 , ( ) = . It is not wrong to define j 1 = but it
must be well understood that the square root function for complex number is
different from that of "conventional" real numbers.
which is inconsistent with our definition of j.
1 1 e
j 2 + ( )

1
]
1
2
e
j ( )

1
]
1
2
= e
j 4 ( )

1
]
1
2
= e
j 2
= 1 =
The lesson here is that m and n are not chosen arbitrarily but are constrained by
the definition of the square root. If we ignore the contrain on n and set n=1, then
1 1 e
j ( )

1
]
1
2
e
j ( )

1
]
1
2
= e
j 2 ( )

1
]
1
2
= e
j
= 1 =
it follows that m =n =0 so,
m2 + < and n 2 + < with the restrictions
1 1 e
j n 2 + ( )

1
]
1
2
e
j m2 + ( )

1
]
1
2
=
let m and n be integers, then
Example :
Note that the restriction n 2 + < guarantees that c is a single value function.
Otherwise, changing the value of n will allow for multiple answers: indeed, the equation
c R e
j n 2 + ( )
= has many possible answers. However, the function evaluation c has only
one answer.
n 2 + < where c R e
j n 2 + ( )

1
]
1
2
=
Given that a complex number c can be expressed as c a b , ( ) = a b j + = R e
j n 2 + ( )
=
(where n =0 only when the principal argument is used), the square root function is
defined as:
The square root of a complex number: