Efficient Algorithm for Exponentiation of Imaginary Number



==Efficient Algorithm for Exponentiation of Imaginary Number==

'''Hassan Raza Khan'''<span id="fnc-1"></span>[[#fn-1|<sup>1</sup>]]

<span id="fn-1"></span>
<span style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;">([[#fnc-1|<sup>1</sup>]]) Hassan Raza Khan is a high-school student at The City School DHA Campus, Lahore.</span>

== Introduction ==

Al-Khwarizmi (780-850), in his work ''Algebra,'' provided solutions to various types of quadratic equations, with geometric-based proofs. Under the caliph al-Ma’mun, al-Khwarizmi became a member of the ''House of Wisdom,'' an academy of scientists in Baghdad. This algebraic knowledge reached Italy through translations by Gerard of Cremona (1114-1187) and the work of Leonardo da Pisa (Fibonacci) (1170-1250).

Scipione del Ferro (d. 1526) solved the general cubic equation <math>x^3 + px + q = 0</math>. His formula, passed to Antonio Maria Fiore, initiated a mathematical contest against Tartaglia, who rediscovered the formula and won. Gerolamo Cardano, learning of this, signed an oath of secrecy and later published the formula in his ''Ars Magna'' (1545).

<math>x = \sqrt[3]{\frac{q}{2} + \sqrt{\left(\frac{q}{2}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{p}{3}\right)^3}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{q}{2} - \sqrt{\left(\frac{q}{2}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{p}{3}\right)^3}}</math>

Rafael Bombelli (1526-1572) tackled cubic equations in ''l’Algebra'' (1572). He fully discussed the casus irreducibilis, demonstrating the expression <math>x^3 = 15x + 4</math> and Cardan's formula.

<math>x = \sqrt[3]{\frac{q}{2} + \sqrt{\left(\frac{q}{2}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{p}{3}\right)^3}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{q}{2} - \sqrt{\left(\frac{q}{2}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{p}{3}\right)^3}}</math>

René Descartes (1596-1650), a philosopher, applied algebra to geometry in his work "La Géométrie," laying the foundations for Cartesian geometry (Descartes, 1637). Pressed by friends, he wrote the treatise "Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison et chercher la vérité dans les sciences" (1637), where he associated imaginary numbers with geometric impossibility. Descartes coined the term "imaginary," emphasizing the lack of a corresponding quantity for imagined roots (Descartes, 1637).

<math>z^2 = az - b^2</math>

John Wallis (1616-1703) noted in his "Algebra" that negative numbers, long viewed skeptically, have a physical explanation based on a line with a zero mark. He also made progress in giving a geometric interpretation to <math>\sqrt{-1}</math> (Wallis, 1693).

Abraham de Moivre (1667-1754), seeking religious refuge in London, befriended Newton. In 1698, he mentioned Newton's knowledge of an equivalent expression to what is now known as de Moivre's theorem (Moivre, 1707).

<math>(\cos(\theta) + i\sin(\theta))^n = \cos(n\theta) + i\sin(n\theta)</math>

Leonhard Euler (1707-1783) introduced the notation <math>i = \sqrt{-1}</math>. He visualized complex numbers as points with rectangular coordinates and explored the roots of <math>z^n = 1</math> as vertices of a regular polygon. Euler defined the complex exponential and proved the identity <math>e^{i\theta} = \cos(\theta) + i\sin(\theta)</math> (Euler, 1748).

These historical works, spanning from Al-Khwarizmi to Gauss, reflect a collective focus on unraveling the complex number <math>i = \sqrt{-1}</math>. Despite this rich history, a contemporary challenge persists—finding a quick and efficient method for computing the values of basic complex number exponents. Mathematics can always be simpler.

==The Problem==

Say you want to find the value of  i) <math display="inline">i^{8237918273}</math>; ii) <math display="inline">i^{823718932}</math>; iii) <math display="inline">i^{1291393767}</math>; iv) <math display="inline">i^{812731274}</math>;

and there's like 20 seconds left in the exam, and this paper does not allow calculators. You start solving it something like this:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> i^{8237918273} = \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \cdot \sqrt{-1} \ldots  </math>
|}
|}

and before you know it, the 20 seconds are over. You couldn't even answer any of the question.

The student next to you, the class topper, recognizes that we can find the value of such a large number of <math display="inline">i</math> using polar coordinates, by employing Euler's formula (Euler, 1748). He starts writing:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> e^{i\theta } = \cos (\theta ) + i \sin (\theta{).} </math>
|}
|}

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> i = \cos \left(\frac{\pi }{2}\right)+ i \sin \left(\frac{\pi }{2}\right) </math>
|}
|}

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> i^n = \left(\cos \left(\frac{\pi }{2}\right)+ i \sin \left(\frac{\pi }{2}\right)\right)^n </math>
|}
|}

He now starts using De Moivre's Theorem (Moivre, 1707) <math display="inline">n = 8237918273</math> 

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> i^{8237918273} = \cos \left(8237918273 \times \frac{\pi }{2}\right)+ i \sin \left(8237918273 \times \frac{\pi }{2}\right) </math>
|}
|}

By now, not only does he realize he needs a calculator to use sin and cos, but the proctor also comes and snatches his paper. He could not even solve one of the 4 parts. None of the students was able to solve any part within less than 20 seconds. It was a shame considering how all 4 parts of this question could well be solved within less than 20 seconds using The Algorithm.

==The Algorithm==

The algorithm involves three steps:

<ol>

<li>'''Real/Imaginary number determination'''

If the last two digits are even, the value remains unchanged (either 1 or -1). If odd, subtract 1 (resulting in either i or -i).     </li>

<li>'''Division by 2'''

Divide the resultant number by 2.     </li>

<li>'''Sign determination'''

If the remaining number after division by 2 is odd, the sign is minus; if it's even, the sign is plus. </li>

</ol>

==Proving that only the last two digits are necessary==

To demonstrate that only the last two digits are necessary for determining the value of <math display="inline">i^n</math>, where <math display="inline">n</math> is a large exponent, we can employ the periodicity of powers of <math display="inline">i</math>.

Consider the powers of <math display="inline">i</math> when raised to successive positive integer exponents:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \begin{align}     i^1 & = i \\     i^2 & = -1 \\     i^3 & = -i \\     i^4 & = 1 \\     i^5 & = i \\     i^6 & = -1 \\     i^7 & = -i \\     i^8 & = 1 \\     \vdots  \end{align} </math>
|}
|}

We observe that the powers of <math display="inline">i</math> repeat in cycles of four: <math display="inline">i, -1, -i, 1</math>. This periodicity implies that the value of <math display="inline">i^n</math> depends only on the remainder when <math display="inline">n</math> is divided by 4.

Now, let's consider the exponent <math display="inline">n = 8237918273</math>. We want to find <math display="inline">i^n</math>:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> i^{8237918273} = i^{4k + r}, </math>
|}
|}

Consider <math display="inline">i^{8237918273}</math>. We can express this as <math display="inline">i^{4k + r}</math>, where <math display="inline">k</math> is an integer and <math display="inline">r</math> is the remainder when <math display="inline">8237918273</math> is divided by <math display="inline">4</math>. In this case, <math display="inline">r = 73</math>.

Now, let's break down <math display="inline">i^{8237918273}</math> further:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math>i^{8237918273} = i^{8237918200+73}.</math>
|}
|}

Since <math display="inline">8237918200</math> has two zeros and is divisible by 100, and since 100 is divisible by 4, we can conclude that <math display="inline">8237918200</math> is divisible by 4.

Therefore, <math display="inline">i^{4k+r} = i^{8237918200+73} = i^{8237918200} \cdot i^{73}.</math>

Now, <math display="inline">i^{8237918200}</math> simplifies to <math display="inline">1</math> since any power of <math display="inline">i</math> with an exponent divisible by 4 is equal to 1. Therefore, we have:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math>1 \cdot i^{73} = i^{73}.</math>
|}
|}

So, essentially, <math display="inline">i^{8237918273}</math> is congruent to <math display="inline">i^{73}</math>. This result demonstrates a general pattern: for any large exponent <math display="inline">n</math>, <math display="inline">i^n</math> is congruent to <math display="inline">i^{r}</math>, where <math display="inline">r</math> is the remainder when <math display="inline">n</math> is divided by 4. Thus, only the last two digits of the exponent (<math display="inline">73</math> in this case) are crucial for determining the value of <math display="inline">i^n</math>.

This observation allows for a more efficient approach when faced with large exponentiation of <math display="inline">i</math> without the need to calculate the entire exponent. The periodic nature of <math display="inline">i</math> simplifies the computation, making it feasible to focus solely on the last two digits of the exponent.

==Demonstrating the algorithm==

The three-step algorithm can be used like so:

<ol>

<li><math display="inline">i^{8237918273}</math>;

<ol>

</li>
<li>'''Real/Imaginary number determination'''

The last two digits are 73, an odd number. So it must be an imaginary number (either <math display="inline">i</math> or <math display="inline">-i</math>). Since the number is odd, we subtract it by 1 to make it parallel to its even counterpart, resulting in 72.         </li>
<li>'''Division by 2'''

Dividing 72 by 2 results in 36, an even number.         </li>
<li>'''Sign determination'''

Since the resultant number after division by 2 is even, we can establish that the sign of this number would be positive.

Since the number is both imaginary and positive, it must be <math display="inline">i</math>.     </li>

</ol>

<li><math display="inline">i^{823718932}</math>;

<ol>

</li>
<li>'''Real/Imaginary number determination'''

The last two digits are 32, an even number. So it must be a real number (either 1 or -1). Since the number is even, we do not subtract it, so it remains 32.         </li>
<li>'''Division by 2'''

Dividing 32 by 2 results in 16, an even number.         </li>
<li>'''Sign determination'''

Since the resultant number after division by 2 is even, we can establish that the sign of this number would be positive.

Since the number is both real and positive, it must be 1.     </li>

</ol>

<li><math display="inline">i^{1291393767}</math>;

<ol>

</li>
<li>'''Real/Imaginary number determination'''

The last two digits are 67, an odd number. So it must be an imaginary number (either <math display="inline">i</math> or <math display="inline">-i</math>). Since the number is odd, we subtract it by 1 to make it parallel to its even counterpart, resulting in 66.         </li>
<li>'''Division by 2'''

Dividing 66 by 2 results in 33, an odd number.         </li>
<li>'''Sign determination'''

Since the resultant number after division by 2 is odd, we can establish that the sign of this number would be negative.

Since the number is both imaginary and negative, it must be <math display="inline">-i</math>.     </li>

</ol>

<li><math display="inline">i^{812731274}</math>;

<ol>

</li>
<li>'''Real/Imaginary number determination'''

The last two digits are 74, an even number. So it must be a real number (either 1 or -1). Since the number is even, we do not subtract it, so it remains 74.         </li>
<li>'''Division by 2'''

Dividing 74 by 2 results in 37, an odd number.         </li>
<li>'''Sign determination'''

Since the resultant number after division by 2 is odd, we can establish that the sign of this number would be negative.

Since the number is both real and negative, it must be <math display="inline">-1</math>.     </li>

</ol>

</ol>

In Table 1, we present a matrix illustrating the relationship between the final and initial numbers corresponding to different values of the complex unit <math display="inline">i</math>. The table categorizes the initial and final numbers as either even or odd and displays the resulting values of <math display="inline">i</math> for each combination. This matrix provides a concise reference for understanding the periodicity of <math display="inline">i</math> and its cyclic behavior based on the evenness or oddness of the exponents. Initial Number <math display="inline">N_0</math> is the raw form of the last two digits of the exponent of <math display="inline">i</math> , while Final Number <math display="inline">N_f</math> is the value of the last two digits of the exponent of <math display="inline">i</math> after being processed by the Algorithm (<math display="inline">N_f = \frac{N_0}{2}</math> if <math display="inline">N_0</math> is even, and <math display="inline">N_f = \frac{N_0 - 1}{2}</math> if <math display="inline">N_0</math> is Odd)

{|  class="floating_tableSCP wikitable" style="text-align: left; margin: 1em auto;min-width:50%;"
|+ style="font-size: 75%;" |Table. 1 Matrix of Initial and Final Numbers Corresponding to Values of <math>i</math>
|-
| rowspan='2' colspan='2' style="border-right: 2px solid;" | 
| colspan='2' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-left: 2px solid;" |Initial Number <math>N_0</math>
|-
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-left: 2px solid;" | Even
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | Odd
|- style="border-top: 2px solid;"
| rowspan='2' colspan='1' style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;border-bottom: 2px solid;" |Final Number <math>N_f</math>
| style="border-right: 2px solid;" | Even 
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-left: 2px solid;" | 1
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | <math>i</math>
|- style="border-bottom: 2px solid;"
| style="border-right: 2px solid;" | Odd  
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-left: 2px solid;" | -1
| colspan='1' style="text-align: center;border-right: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | <math>-i</math>

|}

==Purpose of Odd/Even Analysis==

The divisional remainder and its congruent complex numeber counterpart can be illustrated as below:

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 
|-
| 
{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math>1 \equiv i \pmod{4} </math>
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> 2 \equiv -1 \pmod{4} </math>
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> 3 \equiv -i \pmod{4} </math>
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | <math> 0 \equiv 1 \pmod{4} </math>
|}
|}

The odd/even analysis serves as a strategic approach to efficiently determine the divisional remainder of the numbers in the context of complex exponentiation. By focusing solely on the last two digits of the exponent, we can employ a systematic method to evaluate whether the number is divisible by 4.

For instance, consider an exponent with the last two digits being 32. If we divide 32 by 2, we obtain 16, an even number. This indicates that the original exponent is divisible by 2 twice, meaning it is divisible by 4. Therefore, the number is congruent to 0 modulo 4.

On the contrary, let's take another example with the last two digits being 34. If we divide 34 by 2, we get 17, an odd number. In this case, 34 can only be divided by 2 once while remaining a whole number. Consequently, it is congruent to 2 modulo 4.

The same approach is applied to odd numbers, where they are subtracted by 1 in order to align them with their even counterparts. This adjustment ensures that odd numbers maintain their distinctive properties in the modulo 4 arithmetic.

It's worth noting that one could also add 1 instead of subtracting 1 from the odd number. However, by adopting the subtraction approach, the signs become universally positive for even final numbers and negative for odd final numbers. This consistency simplifies the association of odd numbers with negative results and even numbers with positive results, aiding in a more straightforward interpretation of the outcomes.

In summary, the odd/even analysis not only streamlines the computation of complex exponentiation but also provides a clear and consistent method for determining the divisional remainder based on the last two digits of the exponent.

==Acknowledgements==

I want to express my sincere appreciation for the unwavering support and encouragement I received from my friends, family, and teachers throughout the entire research process.

I extend my gratitude to the dedicated reviewers and editors at the Journal of Dawning Research for their insightful feedback, which played a crucial role in refining and improving my paper.

Lastly, I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr Javed Hussain from IBA Sukkur University for his expert guidance. As a high school student new to research papers, his assistance was invaluable. He not only helped me with the paper but also instilled in me the importance of intellectual curiosity and hard work.

===BIBLIOGRAPHY===
Khan, H. R. (2023, October). Efficient Algorithm for Identifying Repeating Patterns Modulo 4 and its Application in Complex Numbers. [https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8zc7e Source]

Merino, O. (2006, January). A Short History of Complex Numbers. University of Rhode Island.

Euler, L. (1748). Introductio in analysin infinitorum. Apud Marcum-Michaelem Bousquet & Socios.

De Moivre, A. (1730). Miscellanea Analytica de Seriebus et Quadraturis [Analytical Miscellany on Series and Integration].

Zhou, X. (2017). Number Theory - Modular Arithmetic: Math for Gifted Students. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Halmos, P. (1980). The Heart of Mathematics. American Mathematical Monthly, 87, 519–524.

Nahin, P. (1998). An Imaginary Tale: The Story of <math>\sqrt{-1}</math> New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Mazur, Barry & Pesic, Peter & Sabbagh, Karl. (2004). "Imagining Numbers" (Particularly the Square Root of Minus Fifteen). The American Mathematical Monthly. 111. 75. 10.2307/4145034. 

Needham, T. (1997). Visual Complex Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.

Dunham, W. (1999). Euler, The Master of Us All, The Dolciani Mathematical Expositions, Number 22, Mathematical Association of America.

Argand, R. (Reprinted 1971). Essai sur une Maniere de Representer Les Quantites Imaginaires dans Les Constructions Geometriques. A. Blanchard.

Descartes, R. (1952). La Geometrie, translated from French and Latin by D. E. Smith and M. Latham. Open Court Publishing Company, La Salle, Illinois.

Crowe, M. (1967). A History of Vector Analysis. U. of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame.

van der Waerden, B. L. (1985). A History of Algebra. Springer Verlag, NY.

Wallis, J. (1685). Treatise on Algebra.

Andreescu, T., & Andrica, D. (2007). Complex Numbers: An Introduction. Birkhäuser.

Andreescu, T., & Andrica, D. (2009). Complex Numbers from A to ...Z. Birkhäuser.

Richeson, D. S. (2008). Euler's Gem: The Polyhedron Formula and the Birth of Topology. Princeton University Press.

Boyer, C. B. (1968). A History of Mathematics. John Wiley & Sons.

Carr, V. (1996). Complex Numbers Made Simple. Elsevier Science. (Original work published 1996)