Introductory university-level calculus, linear algebra, abstract algebra, probability, statistics, and stochastic processes.
Geometric interpretations of complex arithmetic
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
-
The addition and multiplication of complex numbers have interesting geometric interpretations in terms of translation, rotation, and scaling on the complex plane.
Addition is translation
Let \(z_1 = a_1 + ib_1\) and \(z_2 = a_2 + ib_2\) where \(a_i, b_i \in \mathbb{R}\) for \(i = 1, 2\). Then, \(z_1 + z_2 = (a_1 + a_2) + i(b_1+b_2)\). Therefore, on the complex plane, adding \(z_1\) to \(z_2\) to obtain \(z_1 + z_2\) corresponds to translating the point \((a_1, b_1)\) by the vector \((a_2, b_2)\) to obtain the point \((a_1+a_2, b_1+b_2)\). Thus, the four points, \(0, z_1, z_1+z_2\), and \(z_2\) comprise a parallelogram (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Adding two complex numbers.
Multiplication by a real number is scaling
Let \(c \in \mathbb{R}\) and \(z = a + ib\in \mathbb{C}\) with \(a, b\in\mathbb{R}\). Then, \(cz = ca + i(cb)\), which corresponds to the point \((ca, cb)\) on the complex plane. Meanwhile, we have \(|cz| = |c|\cdot|z|\), so the modulus is scaled by \(|c|\). If \(c > 0\), \(cz\) and \(z\) are in the same direction from the origin; if \(c < 0\), then they are in the opposite directions from the origin (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Multiplying by a real number is scaling.
Multiplication by a complex number \(u\) with \(|u|=1\) is rotation around the origin by \(\arg u\).
Figure 4. Multiplication is rotation.
Theorem
Let \(z, u\in\mathbb{C}\) with \(|u| = 1\). If we multiply \(z\) by \(u\), then \(z\) is rotated around the origin by an angle of \(\text{Arg}(u)\) on the complex plane (Figure 4).
Proof.
(Step 1) Note \(1 \in \mathbb{C}\) and \(|1| = 1\). If we multiply 1 by \(u\), we have \(u\cdot 1 = u\) so \(\text{Arg}(u\cdot 1) = \text{Arg}(u)\). Thus, 1 is rotated around the origin by \(\text{Arg}(u)\).
(Step 2) Now consider \(i \in \mathbb{C}\). \(|i| = 1\). Suppose \(z = a + ib\). If we multiply \(z\) by \(i\), we have \(z\cdot i = (a + ib)i = -b + ia\). Note that \(|z|^2 = a^2 + b^2\) and \(|z\cdot i|^2 = |z|^2|i|^2 = a^2 + b^2\). On the complex plane, the squared distance between \(z\) and \(zi\) is given by \(|z - zi|^2 = |(a + b) + i(b - a)|^2 = (a + b)^2 + (b-a)^2 = 2a^2 + 2b^2\). Therefore we have
By the Pythagorean theorem, the angle made by \(z\), 0 (the origin), and \(zi\) is the right angle, \(\pi/2\). Furthermore, this rotation is counter-clockwise. Hence multiplying by \(i\) rotates \(z\) around the origin by \(\pi/2\). However, \(\text{Arg}(i) = \pi/2\). In other words, \(\text{Arg}(zi) = \text{Arg}(z) + \text{Arg}(i)\).
(Step 3) Let \(z,w\in\mathbb{C}\). \(|u(z-w)| = |u|\cdot|z-w| = 1\cdot |z-w| = |z-w|\). Thus multiplying by \(u\) preserves distance.
(Step 4) Let \(z\in \mathbb{C}\). Consider the triple of distances \((|z - 1|, |z-0|, |z-i|)\). These are the three distances of \(z\) from \(1, 0\) and \(i\), respectively.
It is noted that this \(z\) is the only point on the complex plane which has this particular triple of distances from \(1, 0\) and \(i\). Now, \((|uz - u|, |uz - 0|, |uz - ui|) = (|z - 1|, |z-0|, |z-i|)\) since multiplying by \(u\) preserves distances. Note that the triangle with vertices \(u, 0, ui\) is obtained by rotating the triangle with \(1, 0, i\) by an angle \(\text{Arg}(u)\). If a point has a distance from \(u, 0, ui\) equal to \(|z-1|, |z|, |z-i|\), then that point must also be obtained by rotating \(z\) by an angle \(\text{Arg}(u)\).
Thus, we conclude that multiplication by \(u\) has the effect of rotating points in the complex plane by \(\text{Arg}(u)\). ■
Next, consider multiplying \(z\) by an arbitrary non-zero complex number \(\alpha\). We can decompose \(\alpha\) as
If we define \(u = \frac{\alpha}{|\alpha|}\), then \(|u| = 1\). Of course, \(|\alpha|\) is a positive real number. Thus, multiplication by \(\alpha\) can be decomposed into two steps: (1) rotating by \(\arg u\), then (2) scaling by \(|\alpha|\):
\[z \stackrel{\text{rotate}}{\longmapsto} uz \stackrel{\text{scale}}{\longmapsto} |\alpha|(uz) = \alpha z.\]
Defining the birth process Consider a colony of bacteria that never dies. We study the following process known as the birth process , also known as the Yule process . The colony starts with \(n_0\) cells at time \(t = 0\). Assume that the probability that any individual cell divides in the time interval \((t, t + \delta t)\) is proportional to \(\delta t\) for small \(\delta t\). Further assume that each cell division is independent of others. Let \(\lambda\) be the birth rate. The probability of a cell division for a population of \(n\) cells during \(\delta t\) is \(\lambda n \delta t\). We assume that the probability that two or more births take place in the time interval \(\delta t\) is \(o(\delta t)\). That is, it can be ignored. Consequently, the probability that no cell divides during \(\delta t\) is \(1 - \lambda n \delta t - o(\delta t)\). Note that this process is an example of the Markov chain with states \({n_0}, {n_0 + 1}, {n_0 + 2}...
Generational growth Consider the following scenario (see the figure below): A single individual (cell, organism, etc.) produces \(j (= 0, 1, 2, \cdots)\) descendants with probability \(p_j\), independently of other individuals. The probability of this reproduction, \(\{p_j\}\), is known. That individual produces no further descendants after the first (if any) reproduction. These descendants each produce further descendants at the next subsequent time with the same probabilities. This process carries on, creating successive generations. Figure 1. An example of the branching process. Let \(X_n\) be the random variable representing the population size (number of individuals) of generation \(n\). In the above figure, we have \(X_0 = 1\), \(X_1=4\), \(X_2 = 7\), \(X_3=12\), \(X_4 = 9.\) We shall assume \(X_0 = 1\) as the initial condition. Ideally, our goal would be to find how the population size grows through generations, that is, to find the probability \(\Pr(X_n = k)\) for e...
The birth-death process Combining birth and death processes with birth and death rates \(\lambda\) and \(\mu\), respectively, we expect to have the following differential-difference equations for the birth-death process : \[\begin{eqnarray}\frac{{d}p_0(t)}{{d}t} &=& \mu p_1(t),\\\frac{{d}p_n(t)}{{d}t} &=& \lambda(n-1)p_{n-1}(t) - (\lambda + \mu)np_n(t) + \mu(n+1)p_{n+1}(t),~~(n \geq 1).\end{eqnarray}\] You should derive the above equations based on the following assumptions: Given a population with \(n\) individuals, the probability that an individual is born in the population during a short period \(\delta t\) is \(\lambda n \delta t + o(\delta t)\). Given a population with \(n\) individuals, the probability that an individual dies in the population is \(\mu n \delta t + o(\delta t)\). The probability that multiple individuals are born or die during \(\delta t\) is negligible. (The probability of one birth and one death during \(\delta t\) is also negligible.) Consequ...
Comments
Post a Comment