Are real numbers also complex numbers?
To me, all real numbers \(r\) are complex numbers of the form \( r + 0i \).
Are there any countries / school systems in which the term "complex numbers" refer to numbers of the form where and are real numbers and ?
I've been receiving several emails in which students seem to think that complex numbers expressively exclude the real numbers, instead of including them.
Note by
Calvin Lin
7 years, 11 months ago
No vote yet
6 votes
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*or_italics_**bold**or__bold__paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)> This is a quote# I indented these lines # 4 spaces, and now they show # up as a code block. print "hello world"\(...\)or\[...\]to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 32^{34}a_{i-1}\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{2}\sum_{i=1}^3\sin \theta\boxed{123}Comments
I can't speak for other countries or school systems but we are taught that all real numbers are complex numbers. The set of real numbers is a proper subset of the set of complex numbers. Complex numbers are numbers in the form a+bi where a,b∈R. And real numbers are numbers where the imaginary part, b=0.
To avoid such e-mails from students, it is a good idea to define what you want to mean by a complex number under the details and assumption section. Whenever we get a problem about three digit numbers, we always get the example that 012 is not a three digit number. So you can do something like that.
Log in to reply
Indeed. I have a standard list of definitions for less-known terms like floor function, factorials, digit sum, palindromes. I'm wondering about the extent to which I would expand this list, and if I would need to add a line stating
While this looks good as a start, it might lead to a lot of extraneous definitions of basic terms. I also get questions like "Is 0 an integer? Is 1 a rational number?". If I also always have to add lines like
, then the details and assumptions will be overcrowded, and lose their actual purpose.
Log in to reply
I have a suggestion for that. How about writing a mathematics definition list for Brilliant? Then you can write something like this under the details and assumptions section:
"If you have any problem with a mathematical term, click here (a link to the definition list)."
I know you are busy. But I think there are Brilliant users (including myself) who would be happy to help and contribute.
You can still include the definitions for the less known terms under the details section.
I agree with you Mursalin, a list of mathematics definitions and assumptions will be very apreciated on Brilliant, mainly by begginers at Math at olympic level.
I think yes....as a real no. Can be written as r+i0.... Where r is the real part of the no.
Hmm. I've always been taught that the complex numbers include the reals as well. But then again, some people like to keep number systems separate to make things clearer (especially for younger students, where the concept of a complex number is rather counterintuitive), so those school systems may do this.
If your students keep misunderstanding this concept, you can create a kind of nomenclature for complex numbers of the form a + bi ; where b is different from zero. In addition, a similar thing that intrigues me like your question is the fact of, for example, zero be included or not in natural numbers set.
Log in to reply
There isn't a standardized set of terms which mathematicians around the world uses. Often, it is heavily influenced by historical / cultural developments.
There is disagreement about whether 0 is considered natural. For that reason, I (almost entirely) avoid the phrase "natural numbers" and use the term "positive numbers" instead. However, it has recently come to my attention, that the Belgians consider 0 a positive number, but not a strictly positive number. This might mean I'd have to use "strictly positive numbers", which would begin to get cumbersome.
Log in to reply
I have not thought about that, I think you right.
That is an interesting fact. However, in my opinion, "positive numbers" is a good term, but can give an idea of inclusion of the zero. Futhermore, the most right term would be "positive and non-null numbers".
I've never heard about people considering 0 a positive number but not a strictly positive number, but on the Dutch IMO 2013 paper (problem 6) they say "[…], and let N be the number of ordered pairs (x,y) of (strictly) positive integers such that […]". The word 'strictly' is not mentioned on the English paper. Note that Belgians living in the northern part of Belgium speak Dutch.
in our school we used to define a complex number sa the superset of real no.s .. that is R is a subset of C.