definitions of Re(z) and Im(z)

$\begingroup$

Is it possible to derive a formula for Re(z) or Im(z) that does not use Re(z) or Im(z) in the formula? If so, what is it?

In other words, given any complex number z, where z = a+bi, and a and b are both real numbers, can we find a or b without using functions like Re(z), Im(z) or abs(z) (because abs(z) uses Re and Im in its definition)

Edit:I did not consider complex conjugation when writing this. I don't "accept" it because it is a function in terms of the individual real and imaginary components of z.

$\endgroup$ 7

2 Answers

$\begingroup$

If you ''accept'' complex conjugation, then$$\Re(z)=\frac{z+\overline{z}}{2}$$and$$\Im(z)=\frac{z-\overline{z}}{2i}$$

$\endgroup$ 3 $\begingroup$

It depends on that you mean by formula. In a wide sense, as argued below, the answer is no.

Indeed, $\Re(z)$ is not a holomorphic function since its image is the real line. In this sense, there is no formula for $\Re(z)$ that does not involve $\bar z$, because the Cauchy–Riemann equations fail for $\Re(z)$:$$ {\frac {\partial \Re(z)}{\partial {\bar {z}}}}=\frac12 \ne 0 $$

$\endgroup$ 7

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Sign up using Google Sign up using Facebook Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

You Might Also Like