Trying to understand this derivation by Jean-Claude Arbaut, of why formula of quadratic form must hold also for complex variable with complex coefficents.
(derivation starts)
Complex resolution
Again, we start with the equation
$$ax^2+bx+c=0$$
Where $a\neq0$, and $a,b,c\in\Bbb C$.
Then, rewrite the equation
$$\left(x+\frac{b}{2a}\right)^2-\frac{b^2-4ac}{4a^2}=0$$
Now, a complex number $z$ has always a square root (two distinct ones if $z\neq0$, see for example here). We go on with a square root $\alpha$ of $b^2-4ac$, that is, $\alpha^2=b^2-4ac$, so that the equation can be written
$$\left(x+\frac{b}{2a}\right)^2-\frac{\alpha^2}{4a^2}=0$$
It's a difference of squares, and we know that $A^2-B^2=(A+B)(A-B)$, so
$$\left(x+\frac{b}{2a}+\frac{\alpha}{2a}\right)\left(x+\frac{b}{2a}-\frac{\alpha}{2a}\right)=0$$
So the roots are
$$x=-\frac{b}{2a}\pm\frac{\alpha}{2a}$$
Or if you prefer
$$x=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}$$
Important note: there is no canonical way to write that $\sqrt{t}$ is a specific square root of $t\in\Bbb C$, hence this symbol is meaningless. However, since it appears with a $\pm$, we will always work with both roots, so using the symbol here is harmless. Nevertheless, it should be avoided.
(derivation ends)
First of all to get into rewritten form
$$ax^2+bx+c=0 \Rightarrow \left(x+\frac{b}{2a}\right)^2-\frac{b^2}{4a^2}+\frac{c}{a}=0$$ $$\Rightarrow \left(x+\frac{b}{2a}\right)^2-\frac{b^2}{4a^2}+\frac{4ac}{4a^2}$$
But now to me there seems to be 2 options. Either this step is not true or $a^2$ means here $aa$ instead of $aa^*$. Where $a^*$ is it's complex conjugate.
As $$\frac{a}{a^2}=\frac{a}{a^*a}=\frac{a}{a^*}\frac{a^*}{a^2}=\frac{1}{a^*}\ne \frac{1}{a}$$
What is the actual justification for this step?
As now if $a^2$ would mean $aa$ following step seems not to make any sense, if we assume the $b^2$ means $bb^*$. (I've before used this formula in physics, and correct answers have required $b^2=bb^*$, so that's why I assume this.)
$$\frac{b^2}{4a^2}=\frac{bb^*}{4aa}=(\frac{b}{2a})^2$$
Thus both of the ways I can think this with, seems to fail, so I assume there's something fundamental I've understood wrong now.
And also as last one the step of opening the difference of squares would require
$$\frac{\alpha}{2a}\frac{\alpha}{2a}=\frac{\alpha ^2}{4a^2}$$
Which to my knowledge implies $a^2=aa$ (again), but which seemed unconsistent with the step before.