We can represent complex numbers as real matrices, such that arithmetic operations
on complex numbers become equivalent to arithmetic operations on their matrix representations.
Consider a matrix-valued function defined as
,
where and
are the real and imaginary parts of
, respectively. It can be shown that for all
, we have that
.
.
.
, if
.
There seems to be an homomorphism here.
__________
Matrix Representation of a Complex Number
Let , where
and
, be a complex number. Its matrix representation is
.
Let matrices be
,
then the matrix representation of is
.
Note that both and
are orthogonal matrices, and therefore
. Since
is the
identity matrix, we have that
and
commute, i.e.,
.
The matrix representation of the complex conjugate of is
,
which follows from the fact that matrix is skew-symmetric, i.e.,
. The complex conjugate of a complex number can thus be computed by transposing its matrix representation. Since
and
, we have
.
The square of the magnitude of a complex number, , is equal to the determinant of its matrix representation, as follows
.
A complex number written in the cartesian form, , can be converted to its polar form,
, where
and
. Given a complex number in the polar form
, its cartesian form is
,
and its matrix representation is
,
where
is a rotation matrix that rotates a vector in by a counterclockwise angle
radians, leaving the vector’s
unchanged. Matrix
is orthogonal, and thus
. Given that
,
we have . As
for any value of
, we can conclude that
.
Finally, note that , i.e., matrix
rotates a vector in
radians counter-clockwise. If we multiply a complex number by
, we rotate it by a counterclockwise angle of
radians
,
and in terms of matrix representations, this is equivalent to multiplying by matrix
. It does not matter if we multiply by
on the left or on the right, because matrices
and
do commute.
__________
Arithmetic Operations
Let and
be two complex numbers. Their addition/subtraction is thus
,
and from the rules of matrix addition / subtraction it can easily be shown that .
It’s easier to compute products of complex numbers if we write them in the polar form, i.e., and
. The product is thus
. The product of the matrix representations is
,
since . Dividing
by
yields
,
whose corresponding matrix representation is
.
Note that
and therefore .
We can conclude that arithmetic operations on complex numbers are equivalent to arithmetic operations on the matrices representing such complex numbers.
I have absolutely no idea what use this matrix representation could possibly have, but it’s quite interesting nonetheless.
__________
Related:
Tags: Complex Numbers, Linear Algebra, Mathematics, Matrix Theory
November 11, 2008 at 16:37 |
This reminds me of a chapter in Hirsch and Smale’s wonderful book, Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems and Linear Algebra, where they discuss the complex numbers/2×2 matrices isomorphism in detail.
November 17, 2008 at 11:16 |
Hi Rod
I wasn’t aware of this stuff and yet complex analysis is one of my favourite areas of mathematics! It looks like an interesting bit of maths but, like you, I would love to see a practical application.
Cheers,
Mike
December 1, 2008 at 15:41 |
Here’s an application:
Suppose you wanted a finite set of
matrices such that the determinant of the difference of any two matrices is non-zero. To get the matrices, we can choose a collection of complex numbers and use its appropriate matrix representation in order to get this property for the matrices. Since the difference of the matrices is isomorphic to the difference of two complex numbers, the difference matrix is invertible as long as the two matrices are different. This is the basis of designing ‘space time codes’, which are used for communication on multiple antenna wireless channels.
This principle can be extended to obtaining
matrices with the aforementioned property, however, instead of representing complex numbers, one needs to represent appropriate algebraic structures, such as division algebras, examples of which are complex numbers and hamiltons quaternions.
In fact, your observation is a specific instance of a more general principle. If I remember correctly, any associative algebra can be embedded isomorphically into a sub-algebra of a suitable matrix algebra. Now all that remains is to choose your starting associative algebra correctly. As it turns out, for the application at hand, the “correct” algebra is the cyclic division algebra.
Btw, Rod, nice blog!
December 16, 2008 at 02:22 |
Note that this can be taken much further if instead of using the transpose as analogue to complex conjugation, we use the adjoint. Then much of matrix arithmetic will match complex arithmetic.
May 3, 2009 at 17:33 |
Nitpick: the map
is not an isomorphism because it’s not onto. Another way to see that is to note that
is a field but
is not, so it’s impossible for them to be isomorphic.
That said, the subspace generated by matrices of that form is a field which is isomorphic to the complex numbers.
May 4, 2009 at 04:48 |
You are absolutely correct. Since map
is not onto, it can’t be an isomorphism. I suppose it’s only a homomorphism.
Thanks for pointing that out. I will correct the post right away.
May 12, 2009 at 01:08 |
Nice post. There’s a similar topic thats related to this in Yahoo answers or Google groups, I think. I’ll find the link and post it back here. This should spark up a good debate.
December 10, 2011 at 09:10 |
“I have absolutely no idea what use this matrix representation could possibly have, but it’s quite interesting nonetheless.”
Inverse of a matrix of complex numbers is one of the uses .
February 13, 2012 at 07:31 |
using complex numbers in matrix librarys which can’t handle complex numbers is another use.