Talk:Complex conjugate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 imaginary vs pure imaginary
2 Asterisks versus overlines
3 "if w is non-zero" removed (small item)
4 LaTeX template removed
5 typography

[edit] imaginary vs pure imaginary

"imaginary" could mean pure imaginary... ...and "complex" does not negate "real". Real roots do not come by pairs. So we're on a par. A better idea ? --FvdP

hmmm.... I've always seen them called them "real roots" vs. "complex roots" (in UK terminology at least). I suppose we could say "non-real", but it sounds clunky. -- Tarquin 00:10 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

you may be right about "complex"... it's been a time. (But yet, outside of that "root" context "complex" does not entail "non-real".) I wrote "outside of the real line", more pedestrian but less clunky. Perhaps is the whole think not worth the fuss, either. Too late ;-) --FvdP 00:14 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

As far as I know: A complex number z = a + ib, where a and b are real and i is the imaginary unit (i² = -1). Therefore a complex number could be where b = 0, leaving just z = a, a is real. Basically, I think a real numbers are a subset of complex numbers. I'm pretty sure that's the case. Though when you say "complex" you typically mean where b <> 0. (Technically, real roots do come in pairs... r = a ± ib, b <> 0 :-P) -- Deskana (talk page) 19:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Asterisks versus overlines

The article should probably be converted from asterisk notation (a*) to overline notation ( $\overline{a}$ ) to avoid confusion with the conjugate transpose. I haven't seen anything but conjugation use overline notation, has anyone else? -FunnyMan 18:02, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

I strongly second this proposal: overline is the standard notation in complex analysis and geometry.--FpWl 18:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've seen both notations in physics and mathematics. At the very least, a section on the different notations should be added. Perhaps I'll do that now... Dan Granahan 16:15, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I also endorse this proposal, if nothing else it helps the article agree with the complex numbers entry. I went ahead and made the change. Thenub314 21:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "if w is non-zero" removed (small item)

I removed "if w is non-zero" from the following:

$\left({\frac{z}{w}}\right)^* = \frac{z^*}{w^*}$ if w is non-zero

because I am almost certain that the equality still holds when w is zero. Even though dividing by zero is not desirable in many cases, it is still mathematically *defined* as "undefined" (in most number systems). Please correct me if i'm wrong. Fresheneesz 08:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)