I don't know why they decided not to nomalize the result in a symbolic. Maybe they thought it was only important for numeric results. You can get the result you expect if you first enter (-1,-1) and then do ARG. You'll get a numeric which you can convert to the desired symbolic with an XQ or a ->Q(pi) operation. You also can use XQ to convert (-1,-1) to the symbolic '-1+i*(-1)' and ->num to convert that back to (-1,-1), or actually, (-1.,-1.). Bottom line, if you're going to be nitpicky about the form of the result, you'll have to do a little more work on it. --- On Wed, 10/22/08, Simone <gems_tux@...> wrote: > From: Simone <gems_tux@...> > Subject: [50g] principal value of ARG(z) of a complex number z > To: 50g@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 2:33 AM > Why HP 50g uses this definition of principal value of ARG(z) > of a > complex number z: (ARG(z=x+y*i)-> > ATAN(y/x)+(1-x/ABS(x))*pi/2? > > -pi<principal value of ARG(z)<=pi -> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_number#Polar_form > > Ex. ARG(-1-1*i)=(5/4)*pi instead of -(3/4)*pi > > Greetings, > Simone. > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Message
Re: [50g] principal value of ARG(z) of a complex number z
2008-10-24 by Don Hart
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.