Shouldn't the product of all $n$-th roots of unity be $1$?












0












$begingroup$


nth root of unity:



$$
1^{1/n} = e^{i2pi k/n} k=0,1,...,n-1
$$



multiplying together all the nth roots of unit to get back "1":



$$
1=prod_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{ileft(2pi k/nright)}
$$



for n=2:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/2}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/2}right) \
1=left(1right)left(-1right) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1?



For n=4:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(2right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(3right)/4}right) \
1=left(1right)left(iright)left(-1right)left(-iright) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1? shouldn't it be "1"?



A few definitions:



$$
e^{itheta} = cos(theta) + i sin(theta)
$$



$$
e^{-itheta} = cos(theta) - i sin(theta)
$$



$$
i*i = -1
$$



$$
frac{1}{i} = -i
$$










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 1:33








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:01








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:05








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:13






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    (You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:31
















0












$begingroup$


nth root of unity:



$$
1^{1/n} = e^{i2pi k/n} k=0,1,...,n-1
$$



multiplying together all the nth roots of unit to get back "1":



$$
1=prod_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{ileft(2pi k/nright)}
$$



for n=2:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/2}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/2}right) \
1=left(1right)left(-1right) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1?



For n=4:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(2right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(3right)/4}right) \
1=left(1right)left(iright)left(-1right)left(-iright) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1? shouldn't it be "1"?



A few definitions:



$$
e^{itheta} = cos(theta) + i sin(theta)
$$



$$
e^{-itheta} = cos(theta) - i sin(theta)
$$



$$
i*i = -1
$$



$$
frac{1}{i} = -i
$$










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 1:33








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:01








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:05








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:13






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    (You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:31














0












0








0





$begingroup$


nth root of unity:



$$
1^{1/n} = e^{i2pi k/n} k=0,1,...,n-1
$$



multiplying together all the nth roots of unit to get back "1":



$$
1=prod_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{ileft(2pi k/nright)}
$$



for n=2:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/2}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/2}right) \
1=left(1right)left(-1right) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1?



For n=4:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(2right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(3right)/4}right) \
1=left(1right)left(iright)left(-1right)left(-iright) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1? shouldn't it be "1"?



A few definitions:



$$
e^{itheta} = cos(theta) + i sin(theta)
$$



$$
e^{-itheta} = cos(theta) - i sin(theta)
$$



$$
i*i = -1
$$



$$
frac{1}{i} = -i
$$










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




nth root of unity:



$$
1^{1/n} = e^{i2pi k/n} k=0,1,...,n-1
$$



multiplying together all the nth roots of unit to get back "1":



$$
1=prod_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{ileft(2pi k/nright)}
$$



for n=2:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/2}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/2}right) \
1=left(1right)left(-1right) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1?



For n=4:



$$
1=left(e^{i2pileft(0right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(1right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(2right)/4}right)left(e^{i2pileft(3right)/4}right) \
1=left(1right)left(iright)left(-1right)left(-iright) \
1= -1
$$



why is 1 = -1? shouldn't it be "1"?



A few definitions:



$$
e^{itheta} = cos(theta) + i sin(theta)
$$



$$
e^{-itheta} = cos(theta) - i sin(theta)
$$



$$
i*i = -1
$$



$$
frac{1}{i} = -i
$$







complex-numbers






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 13 at 2:33









Blue

49.7k870158




49.7k870158










asked Jan 13 at 1:25









MrCasualityMrCasuality

82




82








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 1:33








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:01








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:05








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:13






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    (You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:31














  • 7




    $begingroup$
    You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 1:33








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    "I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:01








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:05








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:13






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    (You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:31








7




7




$begingroup$
You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 1:33






$begingroup$
You seem to have determined that the initial "equality" is sometimes false. Indeed, the product of the $n$-th roots of unity isn't always unity.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 1:33






3




3




$begingroup$
"I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:01






$begingroup$
"I'm just finding all the nth roots of unity and multiplying them together" ... That's as good a way to spend an evening as any, but ... Who told you that you'd get $1$ as the result? You've shown for yourself that this simply isn't true, even for $n=2$. To ensure that you get $1$ from an $n$-th root of unity, you take the product of $n$ copies of that root.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:01






3




3




$begingroup$
In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:05






$begingroup$
In $sqrt{2}cdot sqrt{2}=2$ (or $(-sqrt{2})cdot(-sqrt{2})=2$), you're multiplying a particular square root of $2$ by itself, getting $2$; that is what square roots do. But if you multiply the two different square roots of two together, you get $sqrt{2}cdot(-sqrt{2})=-2 neq 2$.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:05






2




2




$begingroup$
I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:13




$begingroup$
I don't have time to watch a six-minute video to find the source of your confusion. Can you provide a time stamp?
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:13




2




2




$begingroup$
(You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:31




$begingroup$
(You either meant $x^2-1$, or else you omitted some $sqrt{2}$s in your factors, but be that as it may ...) I'm happy that someone got through to you. :)
$endgroup$
– Blue
Jan 13 at 2:31










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

The $n$th roots of unity are the roots of the polynomial $x^n - 1$.



If you factor this polynomial as
$$x^n - 1 = prod_{j=0}^{n-1} (x-e^{2pi i j/n}) ,$$
then you will notice by multiplying out and comparing constant terms that the product of the roots is $pm 1$, with the sign depending on whether $n$ is even or odd.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 3




    $begingroup$
    For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:27



















2












$begingroup$

Clearly the original claim is false.



Roots of unity come in two types: the real ones, and the pairs of complex conjugates. The complex conjugates, being of unit modulus, give pairwise products of $1$. That leaves the real roots. For an odd index like cube roots there is just the real root $1$, which when multiplied by all those complex conjugate pairs still gives $1$. But for even indices like square or fourth roots, there's that other real root $-1$. That's when the overall product becomes $-1$, too.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071610%2fshouldnt-the-product-of-all-n-th-roots-of-unity-be-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    The $n$th roots of unity are the roots of the polynomial $x^n - 1$.



    If you factor this polynomial as
    $$x^n - 1 = prod_{j=0}^{n-1} (x-e^{2pi i j/n}) ,$$
    then you will notice by multiplying out and comparing constant terms that the product of the roots is $pm 1$, with the sign depending on whether $n$ is even or odd.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 3




      $begingroup$
      For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Jan 13 at 2:27
















    1












    $begingroup$

    The $n$th roots of unity are the roots of the polynomial $x^n - 1$.



    If you factor this polynomial as
    $$x^n - 1 = prod_{j=0}^{n-1} (x-e^{2pi i j/n}) ,$$
    then you will notice by multiplying out and comparing constant terms that the product of the roots is $pm 1$, with the sign depending on whether $n$ is even or odd.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 3




      $begingroup$
      For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Jan 13 at 2:27














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    The $n$th roots of unity are the roots of the polynomial $x^n - 1$.



    If you factor this polynomial as
    $$x^n - 1 = prod_{j=0}^{n-1} (x-e^{2pi i j/n}) ,$$
    then you will notice by multiplying out and comparing constant terms that the product of the roots is $pm 1$, with the sign depending on whether $n$ is even or odd.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    The $n$th roots of unity are the roots of the polynomial $x^n - 1$.



    If you factor this polynomial as
    $$x^n - 1 = prod_{j=0}^{n-1} (x-e^{2pi i j/n}) ,$$
    then you will notice by multiplying out and comparing constant terms that the product of the roots is $pm 1$, with the sign depending on whether $n$ is even or odd.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Jan 13 at 2:16









    DaneDane

    3,2491836




    3,2491836








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Jan 13 at 2:27














    • 3




      $begingroup$
      For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Jan 13 at 2:27








    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:27




    $begingroup$
    For those that don't know, this is precisely the implication of Vieta's Formula for the constant term.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Jan 13 at 2:27











    2












    $begingroup$

    Clearly the original claim is false.



    Roots of unity come in two types: the real ones, and the pairs of complex conjugates. The complex conjugates, being of unit modulus, give pairwise products of $1$. That leaves the real roots. For an odd index like cube roots there is just the real root $1$, which when multiplied by all those complex conjugate pairs still gives $1$. But for even indices like square or fourth roots, there's that other real root $-1$. That's when the overall product becomes $-1$, too.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      2












      $begingroup$

      Clearly the original claim is false.



      Roots of unity come in two types: the real ones, and the pairs of complex conjugates. The complex conjugates, being of unit modulus, give pairwise products of $1$. That leaves the real roots. For an odd index like cube roots there is just the real root $1$, which when multiplied by all those complex conjugate pairs still gives $1$. But for even indices like square or fourth roots, there's that other real root $-1$. That's when the overall product becomes $-1$, too.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        Clearly the original claim is false.



        Roots of unity come in two types: the real ones, and the pairs of complex conjugates. The complex conjugates, being of unit modulus, give pairwise products of $1$. That leaves the real roots. For an odd index like cube roots there is just the real root $1$, which when multiplied by all those complex conjugate pairs still gives $1$. But for even indices like square or fourth roots, there's that other real root $-1$. That's when the overall product becomes $-1$, too.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Clearly the original claim is false.



        Roots of unity come in two types: the real ones, and the pairs of complex conjugates. The complex conjugates, being of unit modulus, give pairwise products of $1$. That leaves the real roots. For an odd index like cube roots there is just the real root $1$, which when multiplied by all those complex conjugate pairs still gives $1$. But for even indices like square or fourth roots, there's that other real root $-1$. That's when the overall product becomes $-1$, too.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 13 at 2:52









        Oscar LanziOscar Lanzi

        13.7k12136




        13.7k12136






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071610%2fshouldnt-the-product-of-all-n-th-roots-of-unity-be-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bressuire

            Cabo Verde

            Gyllenstierna