If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

## Algebra (all content)

### Course: Algebra (all content)>Unit 16

Lesson 11: Challenging complex number problems

# Challenging complex numbers problem (3 of 3)

Paper 1 Problem 39 from the challenging 2010 IIT JEE exam, about complex numbers. Created by Sal Khan.

## Want to join the conversation?

• I don't understand how it made the demand C, why are the numbers one above the other?
-Excuse my English and thanks • Could someone explain why he cross multiplied and subtracted equations? • Matrices are hard to express in this note editor, which is why people put the links in their answers. Anyway,

Let the first row be
|a b|
Let the second row be
|c d|

|a b|
|c d|

The determinant of M is found by multiplying a times d and subtracting the product of c and b
In other words, the determinant = (ad) - (cb)

|2 1|
|2 -3|
The determinant is (2∙ -3) - (2∙1) = -6 -2 = -8
• Isn't there a shortcut to get the same solutions? • Is there a faster method to do the problem as in the exam we dont much time to go over each and every option? • At , Sal explains that he knows that the conjugate of z minus the conjugate of zsub1 equals the difference of zsub and zsub1 times t. He says that by looking at the negative imaginary parts you can trace that this is true, but when he did it at first to solve for z - zsub1, he used the provided definition for z. At this point, how can you just switch signs on the imaginary part and know what to do in terms of the given definition, which has zsub2 and zsub1 - I can't see how switching the imaginary part tells me how to change the signs on that other side, much less the whole other side of z - zsub1... • Oh, well, that is because `the conjugate` of a complex number is merely the same number with a different sign on the imaginary part of the complex number. Sorry if that goes in a circle--it is the actual definition of conjugate. He repeated the definition about 5 times there as he talked about how you could go ahead and confirm what he is saying.
Example
A complex number of the general form `a + bi` such as
3 + 4i
This COULD be used for z2, for example, at least for guess and check purposes.
a = 3
b = 4
The conjugate of `3 + 4i` is `3 - 4i`
Another complex number
-2 + 8i
You could use that as z1, I suppose
a = -2
b = 8
The conjugate of `-2 + 8i` is `-2 - 8i`
Notice that only the sign of the imaginary part of the complex number is changed

Another complex number
6 - 2i
a = 6
b = -2
The conjugate of `6 - 2i` is `6 + 2i`
All he is saying is that, if you go back and substitute `a + bi` for Z and `a1 + b1i` for z1, and so on, AND for all the conjugates like zbar (you would have `a - bi` for zbar--notice that "the sign of the imaginary part of the complex number has been swapped")
then you could go back to the first video in this series and re-prove (with about a half day of substituting) that
z- z1 = t(z2 - z1) using the general expansion I just gave and eventually that this determinant is also truly equal to zero.
• C) is a matrix ,but why is he assuming determinant?
Option C doesnt bring determinant at all it just shows matrix? why? • Sir,if (sinx/2+cosx/2+itanx)/(1+2isinx/2) is purely real, then all possible values of x are?
I'm finding difficulty in solving this plz help!
Thanks
(1 vote) • I don't understand at @ that how does conjugate of
conjugate Z - conjugate Z(sub1) = t ( conjugate(Z(sub2)) - conjugate(Z(sub1)) ). • p - u = tw
p, u, and w are complex numbers, t is a scalar
Let's define a function cge(z) = conjugate(z), where z is a complex number.
There's a pattern or rule you can follow which can be derived from observations or testing out different values to see this pattern. The pattern can be stated as:
The conjugate of a difference of complex numbers is equal to the difference of the conjugate of each of those complex numbers.
In other words, cge(p - u) = cge(p) - cge(u)
With this we can then show that cge(z) - cge(z1) = t(cge(z2) - cgez1))

Now with the above rule we can definitely see the relationship.
p - u = tw
Take the conjugate of both sides
cge(p - u) = cge(tw)
Split up the conjugate of the difference into the difference of two conjugates (our rule).
cge(p) - cge(u) = cge(tw)
The conjugate of a scalar is still a scalar
cge(p) - cge(u) = t*cge(w)

We can apply the above steps to our original expression
z - z1 = t(z2 - z1)
cge(z - z1) = cge(t(z2 - z1))
cge(z) - cge(z1) = t*cge(z2 - z1)
cge(z) - cge(z1) = t*(cge(z2) - cge(z1))

And there you have it.

A little caveat, I don't even know if the rule is actually a rule. It was just a observation that I made after testing out different complex numbers.  