2

Id like to know how the complex numbers are derived from axioms. Most textbooks talk of them as starting from the complex plane. Is there a way to derive the complex properties from say the properties of fields or is there some peano axiom like system for complex numbers.

jim
  • 29
  • 1
    Which books "talk of them as starting from the complex plan"? The typical way to introduce them is by demanding a system which includes a number $"i"$ such that $\sqrt-1=i$ . – MathematicianByMistake May 08 '16 at 18:52
  • This is just out of my curiosity... – jim May 08 '16 at 18:59
  • Algebraically, the idea is to define field operations on RxR such that Rx0 = R. (That is (a,0) + (b,0) must equal (a+b,0) and (a,0)×(b,0) =(ab,)). – fleablood May 08 '16 at 19:10
  • Which axioms do you want to derive the complex numbers from, and in what sense? – guest May 08 '16 at 21:19
  • @guest: I think that's his question, and I don't think a satisfactory answer has been provided yet. I think the question is interesting. In particular, can we word the axioms so that they don't include the concept of the modulus $|z|$ of a complex number $z$? In $\mathbb{R}$ we have the completeness axiom, and we can avoid talking about things like convergence of sequences (which is metric-dependent, and is how we might define completeness in an arbitrary metric space) by using the fact that $\mathbb{R}$ is ordered; but $\mathbb{C}$ lacks an ordering which is compatible with its structure. – Will R May 09 '16 at 00:03

3 Answers3

5

You can construct the real numbers $\mathbb{R}$ then define complex numbers to be the set $\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}$ equipped with component-wise addition $$(a,b)+(c,d)=(a+c,b+d)$$

and multiplication given by

$$(a,b)\cdot(c,d)=(ac-bd,ad+bc)$$

Alex Mathers
  • 18,509
3

Another way that has not yet been given, although it isn't so from first principles, is to "construct" the complex numbers as a quotient ring $\mathbb{R}[x]/\langle x^2 + 1\rangle$, where $\langle x^2+1\rangle$ is an ideal in $\mathbb{R}[x]$. Then $1$ is the ideal $ 1 + \langle x^2+1\rangle$ and $i$ is the ideal $x + \langle x^2+1\rangle$. Multiply the first ideal by $a$ and the second by $b$ and add them to form a number, repeat with a separate $c,d$ and you get the rules in the answer given by Alex. A little more work is needed, since the quotient ring must be a field like $\mathbb{C}$. To do this, you simply need to show that the ideal $\langle x^2+1\rangle$ is maximal. This particular treatment is given in Galois Theory, 2nd Edition by David A. Cox.

The set of reals in this construction are all values $r + \langle x^2+1\rangle$ where $r \in \mathbb{R}$. Consequently the field $\mathbb{R}$ is a subfield of $\mathbb{C}$.

The proper statement for this is $R[x]/\langle x^2+1\rangle \simeq \mathbb{C}$, or that the two are equivalent up to isomorphism.

I am assuming here you are happy with the existence of $\mathbb{R}$ and at least reasonably comfortable with the concept of Rings and Ideals. If not, I like Rings, Fields and Groups by Allenby and Classic Set Theory by Derek Goldrei because it covers this from a set-theoretic perspective and is written in a style suitable for self study (full disclosure: I'm an OU student and have exchanged a few forum posts inside the OU with the author).

diagprov
  • 219
2

The natural way to obtain complex numbers is Field extension, and $\mathbb{C}$ is the only possible finite extension of reals. Simply talking, each extension is obtained by inviting new numbers that extend the area of usage of our algebraic operations (seeking algebraic closure of the set). We have derived $\mathbb{Z}$ from $\mathbb{N}$ by solving equation $x + a = 0$, then have derived $\mathbb{Q}$ from $\mathbb{Z}$ by solving $x*y=a$, then extensions of $\mathbb{Q}$ (algebraic numbers) appear when we try to solve $x^n - a = 0$ and $\mathbb{R}$ with its irrational numbers is a closure of $\mathbb{Q}$ (as $\mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $\mathbb{R}$ and we can approach any irrational number with a sequence of rationals). Finally, $\mathbb{C}$ is derived from the solutions of equation $x^n + a = 0$ and $\mathbb{C}$ is algebraically closed, according to the fundamental theorem of algebra (ok, the field of complex algebraic numbers, but we have already invented transcendentals in $\mathbb{R}$).

Slowpoke
  • 852