虚数的本质 | 从旋转变换到复平面的几何直观

注：本文为 “虚数” 相关合辑。
中文引文，略作重排。
英文引文，机翻未校。
如有内容异常，请看原文。

---

图解虚数 $i$ 的意义

阮一峰，2012 年 9 月 24 日

一、虚数的定义

首先，建立一条数轴，其上取两个方向相反的点，分别对应 $+1$ 与 $-1$。

数轴的正半轴可绕原点旋转。当 $+1$ 绕原点逆时针旋转 $180^{\circ }$ 后，其位置与 $-1$ 重合。

上述旋转等价于 $+1$ 绕原点连续两次逆时针旋转 $90^{\circ }$。

由上述等价关系可得：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(+1)\times (\text{逆时针旋转 }90^{\circ })\times (\text{逆时针旋转 }90^{\circ })& =-1\end{array}$$

消去式中的 $+1$，关系式简化为：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(\text{逆时针旋转 }90^{\circ }{)}^2& =-1\end{array}$$

将"逆时针旋转 $90^{\circ }$"这一操作定义为 $i$，则有：

$$\begin{array}{rl}{i}^2& =-1\end{array}$$

此式与虚数的定义一致。

结论： 虚数 $i$ 的本质是"逆时针旋转 $90^{\circ }$"的操作，并非传统意义上的数，而是一个表示旋转量的符号。

二、复数的定义

由于 $i$ 表示旋转操作，可借助 $i$ 描述任意实数的旋转状态。

以实数轴为横轴、虚数轴为纵轴，构成一个二维平面，称为复平面。

此时，任意正实数经旋转后，其终边与复平面内的点一一对应。

复平面内一点的坐标由其横坐标与纵坐标确定。例如，复数 $1+i$ 对应复平面上坐标为 $(1,1)$ 的点，其模为 $\sqrt{2}$，幅角为 $45^{\circ }$。

数学家采用 $a+bi$ 的形式表示复平面内的点，其中 $a$ 为横坐标，$b$ 为纵坐标。以坐标 $(1,1)$ 为例，其对应的复数表示为 $1+i$。

此类由实部与虚部组成的表达式称为复数（complex number），其中 $a$ 为实部，$b$ 为虚部。

三、复数的加法运算

虚数的引入简化了涉及旋转的计算。

以物理学中力的合成为例：设有两个力，分别表示为 $3+i$ 与 $1+3i$，需求其合力。

根据力的平行四边形法则，可通过复数加法直接求合力：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(3+i)+(1+3i)& =4+4i\end{array}$$

上述计算体现了复数加法的几何意义：用于合成具有旋转属性的物理量（如力、速度等）。

四、复数的乘法运算

在需要改变旋转角度的情形中，复数乘法的优势更为显著。

以船舶航向调整为例：设某船舶的初始航向为 $3+4i$，若将其航向逆时针偏转 $45^{\circ }$，求调整后的航向。

在复平面中，复数 $1+i$ 的幅角为 $45^{\circ }$。此时，新航向可通过初始航向与 $1+i$ 的乘法运算求得（运算原理见第五节）：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(3+4i)\times (1+i)& =-1+7i\end{array}$$

因此，调整后的航向为 $-1+7i$。

若将航向逆时针偏转 $90^{\circ }$，计算更为简便。由于单位复数 $i$ 的幅角为 $90^{\circ }$，新航向为：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(3+4i)\times i& =-4+3i\end{array}$$

上述例子表明复数乘法的几何意义：用于改变具有旋转属性的物理量的角度（如航向、相位等）。

五、复数乘法的数学证明

以下从数学角度证明复数乘法的旋转性质。

任意非零复数 $a+bi$ 均可表示为模 $r$ 与幅角 $\theta$ 的形式（即极坐标形式）。

设两个复数 $a+bi$ 与 $c+di$，将其分别转化为极坐标形式：

$$\begin{array}{rl}a+bi& =r_1(\cos \alpha +i\sin \alpha )\\ c+di& =r_2(\cos \beta +i\sin \beta )\end{array}$$

其中，$r_1$、$r_2$ 分别为两个复数的模，$\alpha$、$\beta$ 分别为两个复数的幅角。

计算两个复数的乘积 $(a+bi)(c+di)$，代入极坐标形式可得：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(a+bi)(c+di)& =r_1{r}_2(\cos \alpha +i\sin \alpha )(\cos \beta +i\sin \beta )\end{array}$$

展开括号内的乘积：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(\cos \alpha +i\sin \alpha )(\cos \beta +i\sin \beta )& =\cos \alpha \cos \beta +i\cos \alpha \sin \beta +i\sin \alpha \cos \beta +i^2\sin \alpha \sin \beta \\ & =(\cos \alpha \cos \beta -\sin \alpha \sin \beta )+i(\cos \alpha \sin \beta +\sin \alpha \cos \beta )\end{array}$$

根据三角函数的和角公式：

$$\begin{array}{rl}\cos (\alpha +\beta )& =\cos \alpha \cos \beta -\sin \alpha \sin \beta \\ \sin (\alpha +\beta )& =\cos \alpha \sin \beta +\sin \alpha \cos \beta \end{array}$$

可将上式简化为：

$$\begin{array}{r}\cos (\alpha +\beta )+i\sin (\alpha +\beta )\end{array}$$

因此，两个复数的乘积最终表示为：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(a+bi)(c+di)& =r_1{r}_2[\cos (\alpha +\beta )+i\sin (\alpha +\beta )]\end{array}$$

综上可得：

两复数相乘，其积的模等于两复数模的乘积，其积的幅角等于两复数幅角之和。

---

什么是虚数？——复数运算的直观理解

At school, I really struggled to understand the concept of imaginary numbers. My teacher told us that an imaginary number is a number that has something to do with the square root of $-1$. When I tried to calculate the square root of $-1$ on my calculator, it gave me an error. To this day I still do not understand imaginary numbers. It makes no sense to me at all. Is there someone here who totally gets it and can explain it?
上学期间，我一直难以理解虚数的概念。老师告知，虚数与 $\sqrt{-1}$ 有关。然而当我尝试在计算器上计算 $\sqrt{-1}$ 时，却得到了错误提示。直至今日，我仍未理解虚数，它对我而言完全没有意义。是否存在能够彻底理解虚数并予以解释之人？

Why is the concept even useful?
这一概念究竟有何用途？

Imaginary numbers have an intuitive explanation: they “rotate” numbers, just like negatives make a “mirror image” of a number. This insight makes arithmetic with complex numbers easier to understand, and is a great way to double-check your results. Here’s our cheatsheet:
虚数存在直观的解读方式：虚数对数值进行"旋转"操作，如同负数为数字生成镜像。借助这一认知可以更轻松地理解复数运算，同时也能用来复核计算结果。以下为运算速查表：

Complex Operation 复数运算	Intuitive Meaning 直观几何含义
Magnitude: $|z|$ 模长：$|z|$	Distance from zero: $|z|=\sqrt{a^2+b^2}$ 到原点的距离：$|z|=\sqrt{a^2+b^2}$
Addition & Subtraction 加法与减法	Sliding numbers 数值平移变换
Multiplication 乘法	Scale by magnitude, add angles 模长缩放，辐角相加
Division 除法	Shrink by magnitude, subtract angles 模长收缩，辐角相减
Complex Conjugate: $z^{\ast }$ 共轭复数：$z^{\ast }$	“Imaginary Reflection”: Same size, opposite angle “虚轴镜像反射”：模值不变，辐角取反 If $z=3+4\mathrm{i}$ , then $z^{\ast }=3-4\mathrm{i}$ 若 $z=3+4\mathrm{i}$，则共轭复数 $z^{\ast }=3-4\mathrm{i}$
Conjugate Properties 共轭运算性质	$(x+y{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }+y^{\ast }$ [add then reflect = reflect then add] $(x+y{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }+y^{\ast }$【先相加再取共轭 = 先取共轭再相加】 $(xy{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }{y}^{\ast }$ [multiply then reflect = reflect then multiply] $(xy{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }{y}^{\ast }$【先相乘再取共轭 = 先取共轭再相乘】

This post will walk through the intuitive meanings.
本文将逐一讲解各类运算对应的直观几何含义。

0 算术即变换

Arithmetic gives us tools to smoosh, slide and stretch numbers. These transformations are handy: sometimes there’s things in the real world we want to smoosh, slide and stretch in the same way.
算术为我们提供了挤压、平移和拉伸数字的工具。这些变换非常实用：现实世界中的某些事物，有时也需要以同样的方式挤压、平移和拉伸。

Why’s this important?
这为何重要？

Seeing arithmetic as a type of transformation prepares you to make sense of seemingly-weird concepts, like the square root of -1, and visualize problems in a new way. Let’s take a look.
将算术视为一种变换类型，有助于理解看似怪异的概念（如 $-1$ 的平方根），并以全新方式可视化问题。以下展开讨论。

0.1 加法

Addition is simple, yet it can mean several things:
加法看似简单，却可对应多种含义：

• Accumulate: Count up similar quantities (often for tangible items).
  累加：对同类数量进行统计计数，多用于具象实物。

• Slide: Shifting a number along a scale (for less tangible things, like temperature).
  平移：将数值在刻度轴上进行移位，多用于温度等抽象度量。

• Combine: Make a new quantity out of two different ones (like notes in a music chord).
  组合：将两个不同的量融合生成新量，例如和弦里的多个音符。

What’s the right meaning? It depends on the context. When adding apples, we count up similar items (3 apples + 4 apples = 7 apples). When measuring temperature, we add heat to move along a scale (3 degrees + 4 degrees = 7 degrees).
何种含义才是正确的？这取决于具体情境。累加苹果时，对同类物品计数（$3$ 个苹果 $+4$ 个苹果 $=7$ 个苹果）；测量温度时，通过加热使温度沿刻度尺移动（$3$ 度 $+4$ 度 $=7$ 度）。

When adding vectors, a combination makes the most sense: 3 blocks east + 4 blocks north = 5 blocks in a new direction (“as the crow flies” distance). In this case, you must track the component parts, keeping “North” and “East” separate. When adding apples, you can combine everything: once you have 7, you don’t care that it was once 3 and 4.
对向量进行加法时，"组合"最为贴切：向东 $3$ 个街区 $+$ 向北 $4$ 个街区 $=$ 沿新方向 $5$ 个街区（“直线距离”）。此时须追踪各分量，保持"北"与"东"相互独立。而累加苹果时，可将所有物品合并：一旦得到 $7$ 个，便无需关心其原先是否为 $3$ 个和 $4$ 个。

A single operation (addition) can take on several intuitive meanings. This list isn’t exhaustive — they are the interactions I’ve noticed, and I’m sure you have others.
单一运算（加法）可承载多种直观含义。以上列表并不穷尽——它们只是笔者注意到的几种交互方式，相信读者还能发现更多。

0.2 乘法

Multiplication can also be interpreted in several ways:
乘法亦可从多种角度解读：

• Repetition: Performing multiple additions.
  重复：执行多次加法。
• Scaling: Making a number grow or shrink all at once.
  缩放：一次性使数字放大或缩小。

Context determines our meaning. With apples, “4x” means turning an order of 2 apples into an order of 8 (4 groups of 2). With photo software, “4x” means expanding a 2-inch photo to be 8 inches long. Each meaning is different: you’d be annoyed if I gave you a giant, 5-lb apple or 4 separate photos.
情境决定含义。对苹果而言，"$4$ 倍"意味着将 $2$ 个苹果的订单变为 $8$ 个（$4$ 组，每组 $2$ 个）；对照片软件而言，"$4$ 倍"意味着将 $2$ 英寸的照片放大至 $8$ 英寸长。两种含义截然不同：若收到一个重达 $5$ 磅的巨型苹果，或 $4$ 张独立的照片，均会感到困惑。

In a narrow sense, multiplication is “repeated addition”. Sure. But that’s not always the easiest interpretation — care to “repeatedly add” 7.3 times?
从狭义上说，乘法是"重复加法"，这没错。但这并非最简便的解读方式——试问，愿意"重复加" $7.3$ 次吗？

0.3 负数与倒数

Negatives and inverses both represent the idea of “reverse” or “opposite”. But that’s ambiguous: What’s the opposite of multiplying by two?
负数与倒数均表达"反向"或"相反"的概念。然而这一表述存在歧义：乘以 $2$ 的"相反操作"是什么？

“Opposite” can mean a few things:
"相反"可对应多种含义：

• Multiply by 1/2: Turn a profit of 1 into a profit of 1/2 (“unscale” it)
• 乘以 $1/2$：将利润 $1$ 变为利润 $1/2$（“反缩放”）
• Multiply by -2: Turn a profit of 1 into a loss of 2 (flip it)
  乘以 $-2$：将利润 $1$ 变为亏损 $2$（“翻转”）

Yet again, our context determines meaning. When a company “reverses a gain” it implies a loss, aka multiplying by a negative. When we “reverse a zoom” in photo software, we want to shrink the photo (not mirror-image it), so we multiply by 1/2. Context, context, context (tired of that word yet?).
同样，情境决定含义。当一家公司"逆转收益"时，意味着出现亏损，即乘以负数；在照片软件中"撤销缩放"时，希望缩小照片（而非镜像翻转），故乘以 $1/2$。情境、情境、还是情境（是否已经厌倦这个词了？）。

When adding, there’s only one type of opposite: the reverse of +8 is -8. But the trick is to know that -8 really means “0-8” or even “0 + (-8)”: you’re moving backwards relative to some reference point. Moving “in reverse” means different things depending if your original direction was East or North.
加法中仅存在一种"相反"：$+8$ 的反向为 $-8$。但关键在于理解 $-8$ 的实际含义是"$0-8$"或"$0+(-8)$"——即相对于某一参考点向后移动。"反向移动"的具体含义，取决于原始方向是正东还是正北。

0.4 方程的变换视角

Equations ask questions. When you see
方程本质上是在提出问题。当见到

$$x^2=9$$

It’s more than just a plug and chug problem. Think about the question like this:
它不仅是套公式计算的问题。可从如下角度理解：

$$1\cdot x^2=9$$

What transformation (“times $x$”), when applied twice, will turn $1$ into $9$?
何种 变换（即"乘以 $x$"），连续应用两次后，能将 $1$ 变成 $9$？

We have two answers:
答案有两个：

• Scale by $3$ (times $3$): Do it twice and you’ll get $9$: $1\cdot 3\cdot 3=9$
  放大 $3$ 倍（乘以 $3$）：连续进行两次运算结果为 $9$：$1\cdot 3\cdot 3=9$

• Scale by $3$ and flip (times $-3$): Done twice, you get $9$ also: $1\cdot (-3)\cdot (-3)=9$
  放大 $3$ 倍并反向翻转（乘以 $-3$）：连续两次运算后同样得到 $9$：$1\cdot (-3)\cdot (-3)=9$

Nifty. I included “$1$” to show what is being transformed. Sure, it’s optional, but it’s not something we think about. What is the “times $3$” acting on?
特意加入"$1$"，以明确 被变换的对象 是什么。当然，这一步并非必需，却常常被忽略："乘以 $3$"这一运算，究竟作用于何物？

Stepping back this way, we can see arithmetic as a method to push, pull, tug and squeeze one number into another. We’ve managed to turn one large transformation (“times $9$”) into two equal, smaller ones (“times $-3$” or “times $3$”).
从此角度观之，算术实为"将一个数字转化为另一个数字"的方法。一个复杂的变换（“乘以 $9$”），可被拆解为两个相同的、更简单的变换（“乘以 $-3$"或"乘以 $3$”）。

0.5 实例：随机数

Enough theory — let’s show this mindset in action. Most programming languages offer a random() function that gives a number from 0 to 1. But what if you want something from 5-10?
理论已足，以下展示该思维方式的具体应用。大多数编程语言提供 random() 函数，返回 $0$ 到 $1$ 之间的数字。但若需要 $5$ 到 $10$ 之间的数字，该如何处理？

The question is: how do I transform my range of 0-1 into a range from 5-10?
问题归结为：如何将 $0$ 到 $1$ 的区间 变换 为 $5$ 到 $10$ 的区间？

Arithmetic to the rescue!
算术即可解决！

• First, you stretch 0-1 into 0-5 by multiplying by 5
  首先通过乘以5，把区间0-1拉伸至0-5

• Next, slide 0-5 to 5-10 by adding 5
  随后通过加5，把区间0-5平移至5-10

• And tada. You have a range from 5-10.
  操作完成，最终得到5-10的取值区间

Try it out below. You start with a number “r” and transform it into the proper range.
以下可动手尝试。从数字"$r$"出发，将其变换至目标区间。

By the way, this range could be the ages 18-65, the years 1960-2007, or the temperatures 30F – 80F for use in your simulation (everyone runs simulations, right?). No matter your range, you can start with the “0 to 1” building block and modify it.
顺便指出，该区间可以是年龄 $18$ 至 $65$ 岁、年份 $1960$ 至 $2007$ 年，或模拟所需的温度 $30^{\circ }\mathrm{F}$ 至 $80^{\circ }\mathrm{F}$（人人都在运行模拟，不是吗？）。无论目标区间为何，均可从"$0$ 到 $1$"的基本模块出发，进行相应修改。

Sure, you can figure this out without a diagram, but sometimes it’s nice to visualize what’s happening. Our brain is a vision-processing supercomputer, so let’s use its strengths.
诚然，无需图示亦可推导出结果，但有时可视化正在发生的过程颇有裨益。人脑是一台视觉处理超级计算机，应充分发挥其优势。

0.6 结语

This post introduces the idea that arithmetic is a transformation. You bend numbers into other ones, and each transformation has a meaning. Some fit a situation better than others: use the one you like most.
本文介绍了"算术即变换"这一观点。数字可被弯曲变形为其他数字，每种变换均有其特定含义。某些变换更适用于特定情境：选择最符合直觉的那种即可。

The goal isn’t to turn multiplication into a cumbersome diagramming process. It’s a technique, a mindset, a new weapon to use against seemingly complex operations.
目标并非将乘法变成繁琐的图示过程。它是一种技巧、一种思维方式，一种应对看似复杂运算的全新工具。

When studying linear algebra (matrices), you can view multiplication as a type of transformation (scaling, rotating, skewing), instead of a bunch of operations that change a matrix around. This approach will help when we cover imaginary numbers, that foul beast which has befuddled many students.
学习线性代数（矩阵）时，可将乘法视为一种变换（缩放、旋转、倾斜），而非一系列改变矩阵的运算。这一方法有助于理解虚数——这头令众多学生困惑的"怪兽"。

Little insights help bigger ideas click. Happy math.
点滴洞察促成重大领悟。祝学习顺利。

1 数系的扩展

The following sections examine the motivations and mathematical essences of natural numbers, integers, rational numbers, real numbers, and complex numbers, in the historical logic of number system extension.
以下按数系扩展的历史逻辑，依次考察自然数、整数、有理数、实数与复数的构造动机与数学本质。

1.1 自然数

It took quite some evolution, but humans are blessed by their ability to notice that there is a similarity between the situations of having three apples in your hand and having three eggs in your hand. Or, indeed, three twigs or three babies or three spots. Or even three knocks at the door. And we generalise all of these situations by calling it ‘three’; same goes for the other natural numbers. This is not the construction we usually take in maths, but it’s how we learn what numbers are.
人类经历了漫长的演化，才具备这样一种能力：发现"手中有 $3$ 个苹果"与"手中有 $3$ 个鸡蛋"这两种情形具有共性——均为"$3$ 个"。同理，$3$ 根树枝、$3$ 个婴儿、$3$ 个斑点，甚至 $3$ 声敲门，均可将这些情形概括为"$3$"；其他自然数的概念亦依此形成。这并非数学中定义自然数的标准构造方式，却是人类学习数字概念的最初途径。

Natural numbers are what allow us to count a finite collection of things. We call this set of numbers $\mathbb{N}$.
自然数用于计数有限集合中的事物，该数集记为 $\mathbb{N}$。

1.2 整数

Once we’ve learnt how to measure quantity, it doesn’t take us long before we need to measure change, or relative quantity. If I’m holding three apples and you take away two, I now have ‘two fewer’ apples than I had before; but if you gave me two apples I’d have ‘two more’. We want to measure these changes on the same scale (rather than the separate scales of ‘more’ and ‘less’), and we do this by introducing negative natural numbers: the net increase in apples is $-2$.
一旦学会计量数量，很快便需要计量变化量或相对数量。若手中有 $3$ 个苹果，他人取走 $2$ 个，则比之前"少了 $2$ 个"苹果；但若他人给予 $2$ 个苹果，则比之前"多了 $2$ 个"。为使用统一的尺度计量这种"多"与"少"的变化（而非使用两个独立的尺度），引入负自然数：此时苹果的净增量为 $-2$。

We get the integers from the naturals by allowing ourselves to take numbers away: $\mathbb{Z}$ is the closure of $\mathbb{N}$ under the operation $-$.
整数在自然数的基础上，通过允许减法运算得到：$\mathbb{Z}$ 是 $\mathbb{N}$ 在 $-$ 运算下的闭包。

1.3 有理数

My friend and I are pretty hungry at this point but since you came along and stole two of my apples I only have one left. Out of mutual respect we decide we should each have the same quantity of apple, and so we cut it down the middle. We call the quantity of apple we each get ‘a half’, or $\frac{1}{2}$. The net change in apple after I give my friend his half is $-\frac{1}{2}$.
此时两人均感饥饿，但因他人取走了 $2$ 个苹果，手中仅剩 $1$ 个。出于互相尊重，决定平分这个苹果，于是将其切成两半。每人得到的苹果量称为"二分之一"，即 $\frac{1}{2}$。将一半苹果给予友人后，苹果的净变化量为 $-\frac{1}{2}$。

We get the rationals from the integers by allowing ourselves to divide integers by positive integers [or, equivalently, by nonzero integers]: $\mathbb{Q}$ is (sort of) the closure of $\mathbb{Z}$ under the operation $÷$.
有理数在整数的基础上，通过允许整数除以正整数（或等价地，除以非零整数）得到：$\mathbb{Q}$（大致上）是 $\mathbb{Z}$ 在 $÷$ 运算下的闭包。

1.4 实数

I find some more apples and put them in a pie, which I cook in a circular dish. One of my friends decides to get smart, and asks for a slice of the pie whose curved edge has the same length as its straight edges (i.e. arc length of the circular segment is equal to its radius). I decide to honour his request, and using our newfangled rational numbers I try to work out how many such slices I could cut. But I can’t quite get there: it’s somewhere between $6$ and $7$; somewhere between $\frac{43}{7}$ and $\frac{44}{7}$; somewhere between $\frac{709}{113}$ and $\frac{710}{113}$; and so on, but no matter how accurate I try and make the fractions, I never quite get there. So I decide to call this number $2\pi$ (or $\tau$?) and move on with my life.
又取若干苹果，做成派放入圆形烤盘烘烤。有位友人提出，想要一块"曲边长度与直边长度相等"的派（即圆弧段的弧长等于半径）。决定满足该要求，并用有理数尝试计算可切出多少块这样的派。然而始终无法得到精确值：该数量介于 $6$ 与 $7$ 之间，介于 $\frac{43}{7}$ 与 $\frac{44}{7}$ 之间，还介于 $\frac{709}{113}$ 与 $\frac{710}{113}$ 之间……无论将分数精度提至多高，均无法精确表示。于是将该数记为 $2\pi$（或者 $\tau$？），继而进行其他工作。

The reals turn the rationals into a continuum, filling the holes which can be approximated to arbitrary degrees of accuracy but never actually reached: $\mathbb{R}$ is the completion of $\mathbb{Q}$.
实数将有理数扩展为连续统，填补了那些"能被任意精度逼近但永远无法精确达到"的空隙：$\mathbb{R}$ 是 $\mathbb{Q}$ 的完备化。

1.5 复数

Our real numbers prove to be quite useful. If I want to make a pie which is twice as big as my last one but still circular then I’ll use a dish whose radius is $\sqrt{2}$ times bigger. If I decide this isn’t enough and I want to make it thrice as big again then I’ll use a dish whose radius is $\sqrt{3}$ times as big as the last. But it turns out that to get this dish I could have made the original one thrice as big and then that one twice as big; the order in which I increase the size of the dish has no effect on what I end up with. And I could have done it in one go, making it six times as big by using a dish whose radius is $\sqrt{6}$ times as big. This leads to my discovery of the fact that multiplication corresponds to scaling — they obey the same rules. (Multiplication by negative numbers responds to scaling and then flipping.)
实数具有广泛的用途。若需制作一个面积为上次两倍但仍为圆形的派，则需使用半径为原来 $\sqrt{2}$ 倍的烤盘。若认为仍不足够，欲再扩大三倍，则使用半径为上次 $\sqrt{3}$ 倍的烤盘。然而可以发现，要得到最终的烤盘，亦可先将原始烤盘扩大三倍，再扩大两倍——扩大顺序不影响最终结果。且可一步到位：使用半径为原始 $\sqrt{6}$ 倍的烤盘，直接做出六倍大的派。由此发现乘法对应"缩放"——两者遵循相同的规则（乘以负数则对应"缩放后再翻转"）。

But I can also spin a pie around. Rotating it by one angle and then another has the same effect as rotating it by the second angle and then the first — the order in which I carry out the rotations has no effect on what I end up with, just like with scaling. Does this mean we can model rotation with some kind of multiplication, where multiplication of these new numbers corresponds to addition of the angles? If I could, then I’d be able to rotate a point on the pie by performing a sequence of multiplications. I notice that if I rotate my pie by $90^{\circ }$ four times then it ends up how it was, so I’ll declare this $90^{\circ }$ rotation to be multiplication by $i$ and see what happens. We’ve seen that $i^4=1$, and with our funky real numbers we know that $i^4=(i^2{)}^2$ and so $i^2=\pm 1$. But $i^2\ne 1$ since rotating twice doesn’t leave the pie how it was — it’s facing the wrong way; so in fact $i^2=-1$. This then also obeys the rules for multiplication by negative real numbers.
但派还可以旋转。先转一个角度再转另一个角度，与先转第二个角度再转第一个角度的结果相同——旋转顺序不影响最终状态，这与缩放类似。这是否意味着可以用某种乘法来模拟旋转，使新数字的乘法对应角度的加法？若可行，则可通过一系列乘法来旋转派上的点。将派旋转 $90^{\circ }$ 四次后，其回到初始状态，于是定义"旋转 $90^{\circ }$"相当于"乘以 $i$"。已知 $i^4=1$，结合实数运算规则，可得 $i^4=(i^2{)}^2$，因此 $i^2=\pm 1$。但旋转两次（即乘以 $i^2$）并不会使派回到初始状态——其朝向相反方向，故 $i^2\ne 1$，实际上 $i^2=-1$。该定义亦符合负实数的乘法规则。

Upon further experimentation with spinning pies around we discover that defining $i$ in this way leads to numbers (formed by adding and multiplying real numbers with this new $i$ beast) which, under multiplication, do indeed correspond to combined scalings and rotations in a ‘number plane’, which contains our previously held ‘number line’. What’s more, they can be multiplied, divided and rooted as we please. It then has the fun consequence that any polynomial with coefficients of this kind has as many roots as its degree; what fun!
通过进一步实验发现：用上述方式定义 $i$ 后，由实数与 $i$ 进行加减乘运算形成的新数字，其乘法运算确实对应"数字平面"中的"缩放 + 旋转"组合（该数字平面包含了此前熟悉的"数轴"）。更重要的是，这些新数字可自由进行乘、除、开方运算，且带来了一个重要结果：任何以这种数字为系数的多项式，其根的个数恰好等于它的次数。

The complex numbers allow us to consider scalings and rotations as two instances of the same thing; and by ensuring that negative reals have square roots, we get something where every (non-constant) polynomial equation can be solved: $\mathbb{C}$ is the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{R}$.
复数将"缩放"和"旋转"统一为同一种运算的两种表现；同时，它使负实数具有平方根，并且使所有（非常数）多项式方程均可求解：$\mathbb{C}$ 是 $\mathbb{R}$ 的代数闭包。

It occurs to me that I never mentioned anything to do with anything ‘imaginary’, since I presumed that the reader really wanted to know about the complex numbers as a whole. But for the sake of completeness: the imaginary numbers are precisely the real multiples of $i$ — you scale the pie and rotate it by $90^{\circ }$ in either direction. They are the rotations/scalings which, when performed twice, leave the pie facing backwards; that is, they are the numbers which square to give negative real numbers.
此前未提及"虚数"相关内容，因默认读者真正想了解的是整个"复数"体系。但为完整起见，补充如下：虚数正是 $i$ 的实数倍数——即"缩放派的同时，向任意方向旋转 $90^{\circ }$"对应的数。这类旋转 / 缩放操作连续进行两次后，派朝向相反方向；也就是说，虚数的平方为负实数。

2 虚数的几何解释

2.1 从负数到虚数

Negative numbers aren’t easy. Imagine you’re a European mathematician in the 1700s. You have $3$ and $4$, and know you can write $4-3=1$. Simple.
负数并不容易理解。试设想 $18$ 世纪的一位欧洲数学家，已知数字 $3$ 和 $4$，且知道可写出算式 $4-3=1$，这很简单。

But what about $3-4$? What, exactly, does that mean? How can you take $4$ cows from $3$? How could you have less than nothing?
但 $3-4$ 又如何理解？这意味着什么？如何从 $3$ 头牛中取走 $4$ 头？怎么可能存在"比没有还少"的情况？

Negatives were considered absurd, something that “darkened the very whole doctrines of the equations” (Francis Maseres, 1759). Yet today, it’d be absurd to think negatives aren’t logical or useful.
在当时，负数被认为是荒谬的，是"使方程的整个理论体系都变得晦涩难懂"之物（弗朗西斯 · 马塞雷斯，$1759$ 年）。然而今日，若有人认为负数不符合逻辑、没有用处，才是荒谬的。

What happened? We invented a theoretical number that had useful properties. Negatives aren’t something we can touch or hold, but they describe certain relationships well (like debt). It was a useful fiction.
这一转变的发生，在于人类发明了一种"具有实用性质的理论数字"。负数无法被触摸或持有，但能很好地描述某些关系（如债务），是一种有用的抽象构造。

Rather than saying “I owe you 30” and reading words to see if I’m up or down, I can write “$-30$” and know it means I’m in the hole. If I earn money and pay my debts ($-30+100=70$), I can record the transaction easily. I have $+70$ afterwards, which means I’m in the clear.
与其表述为"我欠你 $30$（单位货币）“，再通过文字判断是"负债"还是"盈余”，不如直接记为"$-30$"，即可知处于负债状态。若赚取钱财并清偿债务（$-30+100=70$），亦可轻松记录该交易。最终结果为 $+70$，表明债务已清，无欠款。

The positive and negative signs automatically keep track of the direction — you don’t need a sentence to describe the impact of each transaction. Math became easier, more elegant. It didn’t matter if negatives were “tangible” — they had useful properties, and we used them until they became everyday items.
正负号自动记录"方向"——无需用一句话描述每笔交易的影响，数学因此变得更简洁。负数是否"可触摸"并不重要，重要的是其具有实用价值。人类持续使用负数，直至其成为日常概念。

But let’s not be smug about the struggle: negative numbers were a huge mental shift. Even Euler, the genius who discovered $e$ and much more, didn’t understand negatives as we do today. They were considered “meaningless” results (he later made up for this in style).
然而不应为此沾沾自喜：理解负数是一次巨大的思维转变。即便是发现自然常数 $e$ 等众多成果的天才数学家欧拉，当初对负数的理解亦不如今日深刻。在当时，负数被认为是"无意义"的结果（不过后来其以出色的研究弥补了这一认知差距）。

It’s a testament to our mental potential that today’s children are expected to understand ideas that once confounded ancient mathematicians.
今日的儿童需要理解那些曾使古代数学家困惑不已的概念，这足以证明人类思维潜力之强大。

Imaginary numbers have a similar story. We can solve equations like this all day long:
虚数的"诞生"故事与此相似。如下方程可轻松求解：

$$x^2=9$$

The answers are $3$ and $-3$. But suppose some wiseguy puts in a teensy, tiny minus sign:
答案为 $3$ 和 $-3$。但若在等式右侧添加一个负号：

$$x^2=-9$$

Uh oh. This question makes most people cringe the first time they see it. You want the square root of a number less than zero? That’s absurd! (Historically, there were real questions to answer, but I like to imagine a wiseguy.)
此问题使大多数人初见时感到困惑。欲求一个负数的平方根？荒谬！（从历史角度看，当时确实有需要解决的实际问题。）

It seems crazy, just like negatives, zero, and irrationals (non-repeating numbers) must have seemed crazy at first. There’s no “real” meaning to this question, right?
这看起来很离谱，但就像当初的负数、零和无理数（无限不循环小数）一样，刚出现时均令人难以接受。此问题似乎没有"实际"意义。

Wrong. So-called “imaginary numbers” are as normal as every other number (or just as fake): they’re a tool to describe the world. In the same spirit of assuming $-1$, $0.3$, and $0$ “exist”, let’s assume some number $i$ exists where:
不然。所谓"虚数"与其他任何数字一样正常（或者说一样"虚构"）：它仅是一种描述世界的工具。正如默认 $-1$、$0.3$ 和 $0$ "存在"一样，亦可假设存在数字 $i$，满足：

$$i^2=-1$$

That is, you multiply $i$ by itself to get $-1$. What happens now?
即 $i$ 自乘结果为 $-1$。接下来将发生何种情况？

Well, first we get a headache. But playing the “Let’s pretend $i$ exists” game actually makes math easier and more elegant. New relationships emerge that we can describe with ease.
首先可能感到困惑。然而一旦接受"$i$ 存在"这一假设，数学反而变得更简洁，一些新的关系随之出现，可被轻松描述。

You may not believe in $i$, just like those fuddy old mathematicians didn’t believe in $-1$. New, brain-twisting concepts are hard and they don’t make sense immediately, even for Euler. But as the negatives showed us, strange concepts can still be useful.
有人可能不相信 $i$ 的存在，正如当初某些数学家不相信 $-1$ 存在一样。新颖且令人费解的概念往往难以理解，亦无法立刻体现意义，即便是欧拉也不例外。但正如负数所示，看似奇怪的概念亦可具有重要价值。

I dislike the term “imaginary number” — it was considered an insult, a slur, designed to hurt $i$’s feelings. The number $i$ is just as normal as other numbers, but the name “imaginary” stuck so we’ll use it.
"虚数"这一术语最初带有贬义，仿佛是一种侮辱。实际上，$i$ 与其他数字一样正常，但"虚数"之名已沿用至今，故仍使用之。

2.2 方程的变换视角

前文已从一般算术角度建立了变换视角，本节将其专门应用于虚数，展示如何从"旋转"的直观理解中自然引出 $i$。

Equations ask questions. When you see
方程本质上是在提出问题。当见到

$$x^2=9$$

It’s more than just a plug and chug problem. Think about the question like this:
它不仅是套公式计算的问题。可从如下角度理解：

$$1\cdot x^2=9$$

What transformation (“times $x$”), when applied twice, will turn $1$ into $9$?
何种 变换（即"乘以 $x$"），连续应用两次后，能将 $1$ 变成 $9$？

We have two answers:
答案有两个：

• Scale by $3$ (times $3$): Do it twice and you’ll get $9$: $1\cdot 3\cdot 3=9$
  放大 $3$ 倍（乘以 $3$）：连续应用两次得到 $9$：$1\cdot 3\cdot 3=9$

• Scale by $3$ and flip (times $-3$): Done twice, you get $9$ also: $1\cdot (-3)\cdot (-3)=9$
  放大 $3$ 倍并翻转（乘以 $-3$）：连续应用两次，同样得到 $9$：$1\cdot (-3)\cdot (-3)=9$

Nifty. I included “$1$” to show what is being transformed. Sure, it’s optional, but it’s not something we think about. What is the “times $3$” acting on?
特意加入"$1$"，以明确 被变换的对象 是什么。当然，这一步并非必需，却常常被忽略："乘以 $3$"这一运算，究竟作用于何物？

Stepping back this way, we can see arithmetic as a method to push, pull, tug and squeeze one number into another. We’ve managed to turn one large transformation (“times $9$”) into two equal, smaller ones (“times $-3$” or “times $3$”).
从此角度观之，算术实为"将一个数字转化为另一个数字"的方法。一个复杂的变换（“乘以 $9$”），可被拆解为两个相同的、更简单的变换（“乘以 $-3$"或"乘以 $3$”）。

As described above, the equation $x^2=9$ really means:
如上所述，方程 $x^2=9$ 的实际含义为：

$$1\cdot x\cdot x=9$$

• What transformation $x$, when applied twice, turns $1$ to $9$?
  对数字 $1$ 施加两次变换 $x$ 后得到 $9$，则变换 $x$ 是什么？

The two answers are “$x=3$” and “$x=-3$”: That is, you can “scale by” $3$ or “scale by $3$ and flip” (flipping or taking the opposite is one interpretation of multiplying by a negative).
答案为"$x=3$"与"$x=-3$"。即可以"将 $1$ 放大 $3$ 倍"，或者"将 $1$ 放大 $3$ 倍后再翻转"（"翻转"或"取相反数"是对"乘以负数"的一种解读）。

Now let’s think about $x^2=-1$, which is really
现思考方程 $x^2=-1$，其实际含义为：

$$1\cdot x\cdot x=-1$$

• What transformation $x$, when applied twice, turns $1$ into $-1$? Hrm.
  对数字 $1$ 施加两次变换 $x$ 后得到 $-1$，则变换 $x$ 是什么？

• We can’t multiply by a positive twice, because the result stays positive
  两次均乘以正数不可行，因结果始终为正数。

• We can’t multiply by a negative twice, because the result will flip back to positive on the second multiplication
  两次均乘以负数亦不可行，因第二次乘以负数时结果将翻转为正数。

But what about… a rotation! It sounds crazy, but if we imagine $x$ being a “rotation of $90$ degrees”, then applying $x$ twice will be a $180$ degree rotation, or a flip from $1$ to $-1$!
但若是……旋转！若将 $x$ 想象为"旋转 $90$ 度"，则施加两次 $x$ 变换即为旋转 $180$ 度，恰好使 $1$ "翻转"为 $-1$！

Yowza! And if we think about it more, we could rotate twice in the other direction (clockwise) to turn $1$ into $-1$. This is “negative” rotation or a multiplication by $-i$:
进一步思考，亦可向另一方向（顺时针）旋转两次，同样使 $1$ 变为 $-1$。此为"反向旋转"，相当于乘以 $-i$：

If we multiply by $-i$ twice, the first multiplication would turn $1$ into $-i$, and the second turns $-i$ into $-1$. So there’s really two square roots of $-1$: $i$ and $-i$.
两次均乘以 $-i$，第一次使 $1$ 变为 $-i$，第二次使 $-i$ 变为 $-1$。故 $-1$ 有两个平方根：$i$ 与 $-i$。

This is pretty cool. We have some sort of answer, but what does it mean?
已找到答案，但这意味着什么？

• $i$ is a “new imaginary dimension” to measure a number
  $i$ 是衡量数字的一个“新的虚数维度”

• $i$ (or $-i$) is what numbers “become” when rotated
  $i$（或 $-i$）是数字经过旋转后“变成”的形态

• Multiplying by $i$ is a rotation by $90$ degrees counter-clockwise
  乘以 $i$ 等价于将数字逆时针旋转 $90$ 度

• Multiplying by $-i$ is a rotation of $90$ degrees clockwise
  乘以 $-i$ 等价于将数字顺时针旋转 $90$ 度

• Two rotations in either direction is $-1$: it brings us back into the “regular” dimensions of positive and negative numbers.
  任意方向连续旋转两次得到结果 $-1$，使数值回到正、负数构成的“常规”实数维度

Numbers are 2-dimensional. Yes, it’s mind bending, just like decimals or long division would be mind-bending to an ancient Roman. (What do you mean there’s a number between $1$ and $2$?). It’s a strange, new way to think about math.
数字是二维的。 这令人难以理解，正如小数或长除法对于古罗马人而言难以理解一样（$1$ 与 $2$ 之间尚有数字？）。但这确实是一种新颖的数学思维方式。

We asked “How do we turn $1$ into $-1$ in two steps?” and found an answer: rotate it $90$ degrees. It’s a strange, new way to think about math. But it’s useful. (By the way, this geometric interpretation of complex numbers didn’t arrive until decades after $i$ was discovered.)
问题"如何通过两步操作将 $1$ 变为 $-1$？"的答案是：将其旋转 $90$ 度。这是一种新颖的数学思维方式，但具有实用价值。（顺便指出，这种对复数的几何解读，在 $i$ 被发现后的数十年才出现。）

Also, keep in mind that having counter-clockwise be positive is a human convention — it easily could have been the other way.
另需注意，将逆时针方向定为"正方向"是人类的约定俗成——定为顺时针方向亦完全可行。

2.3 旋转的周期性

Let’s dive into the details a bit. When multiplying negative numbers (like $-1$), you get a pattern:
深入考察细节。反复乘以负数（如 $-1$）时，呈现如下规律：

• $1$, $-1$, $1$, $-1$, $1$, $-1$, $1$, $-1$

Since $-1$ doesn’t change the size of a number, just the sign, you flip back and forth. For some number “$x$”, you’d get:
因 $-1$ 不改变数字的大小，仅改变符号，故结果在正负之间交替。对于任意数字"$x$"，反复乘以 $-1$ 得到：

• $x$, $-x$, $x$, $-x$, $x$, $-x$…

This idea is useful. The number “$x$” can represent a good or bad hair week. Suppose weeks alternate between good and bad; this is a good week; what will it be like in $47$ weeks?
此规律具有实用价值。以"$x$"表示"状态良好的一周"，以"$-x$"表示"状态不佳的一周"。假设每周状态在"好"与"差"之间交替，本周状态良好，则 $47$ 周后状态如何？

$$x\cdot (-1{)}^{47}=x\cdot -1=-x$$

So $-x$ means a bad hair week. Notice how negative numbers “keep track of the sign”: we can throw $(-1{)}^{47}$ into a calculator without having to count (“Week $1$ is good, week $2$ is bad… week $3$ is good…”). Things that flip back and forth can be modeled well with negative numbers.
结果为 $-x$，表明 $47$ 周后状态不佳。负数能"记录符号变化"：只需计算 $(-1{)}^{47}$，无需逐周计数。对于"来回切换"的情形，用负数建模非常合适。

Ok. Now what happens if we keep multiplying by $i$?
现考察反复乘以 $i$ 的情况：

$$1,i,i^2,i^3,i^4,i^5$$

Very funny. Let’s reduce this a bit:
简化这些结果：

• $1=1$
  此式无疑义。

• $i=i$
  无法进一步简化。

• $i^2=-1$
  此式为 $i$ 的定义。

• $i^3=(i\cdot i)\cdot i=-1\cdot i=-i$
  逆时针旋转 $3$ 次等价于顺时针旋转 $1$ 次。

• $i^4=(i\cdot i)\cdot (i\cdot i)=-1\cdot -1=1$
  旋转 $4$ 次后回到初始位置。

• $i^5=i^4\cdot i=1\cdot i=i$
  循环重新开始。

Represented visually:
图表展示如下：

We cycle every $4$th rotation. This makes sense, right? Any kid can tell you that $4$ left turns is the same as no turns at all. Now rather than focusing on imaginary numbers ($i$, $i^2$), look at the general pattern:
每旋转 $4$ 次完成一个循环。向左转 $4$ 次等价于未转弯。现不局限于虚数（$i$、$i^2$ 等），考察整体规律：

• $X$, $Y$, $-X$, $-Y$, $X$, $Y$, $-X$, $-Y$…

Like negative numbers modeling flipping, imaginary numbers can model anything that rotates between two dimensions “$X$” and “$Y$”. Or anything with a cyclic, circular relationship — have anything in mind?
正如负数可用于建模"来回切换"的情形，虚数可用于建模任何在"$X$"与"$Y$"两个维度之间旋转的事物，或任何具有循环、圆周关系的事物。

'Cos it’d be a sin if you didn’t. There’ll de Moivre be more in future articles. [Editor’s note: Kalid is in electroshock therapy to treat his pun addiction.]
若未能想到，则颇为"遗憾"（$\sin$，双关"正弦"）。后续文章将讨论棣莫弗公式（de Moivre）。[编者注：作者因大量使用谐音梗而接受电休克治疗。]

3 复数的结构

3.1 实部与虚部

There’s another detail to cover: can a number be both “real” and “imaginary”?
还有一个细节：一个数字能否既"实"又"虚"？

You bet. Who says we have to rotate the entire $90$ degrees? If we keep $1$ foot in the “real” dimension and another in the imaginary one, it looks like this:
当然可以。谁说必须旋转整整 $90$ 度？若一只脚踩在"实"维度，另一只脚踩在"虚"维度，情形如下：

We’re at a $45$ degree angle, with equal parts in the real and imaginary ($1+i$). It’s like a hotdog with both mustard and ketchup — who says you need to choose?
处于 $45$ 度角的位置，实部与虚部占比相等（即 $1+i$）。这就像热狗既加芥末又加番茄酱——谁说只能选一种？

In fact, we can pick any combination of real and imaginary numbers and make a triangle. The angle becomes the “angle of rotation”. A complex number is the fancy name for numbers with both real and imaginary parts. They’re written $a+bi$, where
实际上，可任意组合实部与虚部的数值，构成三角形，其中的角度即为"旋转角"。同时包含实部与虚部的数字称为"复数"，通常写成 $a+bi$ 的形式，其中：

• $a$ is the real part
  $a$ 为实部
• $b$ is the imaginary part
  $b$ 为虚部

3.2 复数的模

Not too bad. But there’s one last question: how “big” is a complex number? We can’t measure the real part or imaginary parts in isolation, because that would miss the big picture.
但还有最后一个问题：复数的"大小"如何衡量？不能孤立地衡量实部或虚部的大小，因那样会忽略整体情况。

Let’s step back. The size of a negative number is not whether you can count it — it’s the distance from zero. In the case of negatives this is:
退一步思考。负数的"大小"不在于能否被计数，而在于其到原点 $0$ 的距离。对于负数：

$$\text{Size of }-x=\sqrt{(-x{)}^2}=|x|$$

Which is another way to find the absolute value. But for complex numbers, how do we measure two components at $90$ degree angles?
此为求绝对值的另一种方式。但对于复数，如何衡量两个呈 $90$ 度角的分量所构成的整体大小？

• It’s a bird… it’s a plane… it’s Pythagoras!
  此乃勾股定理之应用。

Geez, his theorem shows up everywhere, even in numbers invented $2000$ years after his time. Yes, we are making a triangle of sorts, and the hypotenuse is the distance from zero:
勾股定理无处不在，即便在毕达哥拉斯死后 $2000$ 年才被发明的数字中亦可见其身影。复数可视为直角三角形，其斜边长度即为复数到原点 $0$ 的距离：

$$\text{Size of }a+bi=\sqrt{a^2+b^2}$$

Neat. While measuring the size isn’t as easy as “dropping the negative sign”, complex numbers do have their uses. Let’s take a look.
虽然复数的大小计算不像负数那样"去掉负号"即可，但复数确有实用价值。

4 复数运算的直观理解

4.1 复变量

In regular algebra, we often say “$x=3$” and all is dandy — there’s some number “$x$”, whose value is $3$. With complex numbers, there’s a gotcha: there’s two dimensions to talk about. When writing
在常规代数中，我们常会写出"$x=3$"，表达含义清晰：存在一个变量 $x$，其取值为 $3$。复数体系存在一处不同：描述复数需要两个维度。当书写如下表达式时：

$$z=3+4i$$

we’re saying there’s a number “$z$” with two parts: $3$ (the real part) and $4i$ (imaginary part). It is a bit strange how “one” number can have two parts, but we’ve been doing this for a while. We often write:
该表达式代表一个记作 $z$ 的数由两部分构成：$3$ 为实部，$4i$ 为虚部。单个数字拆分出两个组成部分看似不易理解，但我们早已习惯类似写法。例如日常书写：

$$y=3\frac{4}{10}=3+0.4$$

and it doesn’t bother us that a single number “$y$” has both an integer part ($3$) and a fractional part ($0.4$ or $4/10$). $y$ is a combination of the two. Complex numbers are similar: they have their real and imaginary parts “contained” in a single variable (shorthand is often $\mathrm{Re}$ and $\mathrm{Im}$).
我们不会对单个数值 $y$ 同时包含整数部分（$3$）与小数部分（$0.4$，即 $4/10$）产生疑惑，$y$ 本身就是两部分的组合。复数与之逻辑一致，实部与虚部被整合在同一个变量之内，常用简写符号 $\mathrm{Re}$ 代表实部、$\mathrm{Im}$ 代表虚部。

Unfortunately, we don’t have nice notation like $3.4$ to “merge” the parts into a single number. I had an idea to write the imaginary part vertically, in fading ink, but it wasn’t very popular. So we’ll stick to the “$a+bi$” format.
遗憾的是，复数没有类似 $3.4$ 这种可以将两部分合并书写的简洁记号。曾有人提出将虚部竖向淡印书写的方案，但并未得到广泛使用，因此本文统一沿用 $a+bi$ 的标准书写形式。

4.2 模长的计算方法

Because complex numbers use two independent axes, we find size (magnitude) using the Pythagorean Theorem:
复数分布在两条相互独立的坐标轴上，其大小（模长）通过勾股定理求解：

So, a number $z=3+4i$ would have a magnitude of $5$. The shorthand for “magnitude of $z$” is this: $|z|$
因此复数 $z=3+4i$ 的模长为 $5$，模长的简写记号为 $|z|$。

See how it looks like the absolute value sign? Well, in a way, it is. Magnitude measures a complex number’s “distance from zero”, just like absolute value measures a negative number’s “distance from zero”.
该记号与绝对值符号形式一致，二者本质存在相通之处。模长表征复数在复平面上到原点的距离，如同绝对值表征负数在实数轴上到原点的距离。

4.3 复数加法与减法

We’ve seen that regular addition can be thought of as “sliding” by a number. Addition with complex numbers is similar, but we can slide in two dimensions (real or imaginary). For example:
常规加法可以直观理解为数轴上的平移操作，复数加法逻辑与之相近，只是平移可以在实轴与虚轴两个维度分别完成。示例如下：

Adding $(3+4i)$ to $(-1+i)$ gives $2+5i$.
$(3+4i)$ 与 $(-1+i)$ 相加，结果为 $2+5i$。

Again, this is a visual interpretation of how “independent components” are combined: we track the real and imaginary parts separately.
该几何图示直观体现了相互独立的分量合并规则：实部与虚部分别进行运算。

Subtraction is the reverse of addition — it’s sliding in the opposite direction. Subtracting $(1+i)$ is the same as adding $-1\cdot (1+i)$, or adding $(-1-i)$.
减法是加法的逆运算，对应反方向的平移。减去 $(1+i)$ 等价于加上 $-1\cdot (1+i)$，也就是加上 $(-1-i)$。

4.4 复数乘法

Here’s where the math gets interesting. When we multiply two complex numbers ($x$ and $y$) to get $z$:
复数乘法具备更特殊的几何含义，两个复数 $x$ 与 $y$ 相乘得到 $z$，遵循两条规则：

• Add the angles: $\mathrm{angle}(z)=\mathrm{angle}(x)+\mathrm{angle}(y)$
  角度做加法运算：$\mathrm{angle}(z)=\mathrm{angle}(x)+\mathrm{angle}(y)$

• Multiply the magnitudes: $|z|=|x|\cdot |y|$
  模长做乘法运算：$|z|=|x|\cdot |y|$

That is, the angle of $z$ is the sum of the angles of $x$ and $y$, and the magnitude of $z$ is the product of the magnitudes. Believe it or not, the magic of complex numbers makes the math work out!
即乘积复数的辐角等于两个乘数辐角之和，模长等于两个乘数模长之积。这套规则依托复数体系的数学自洽性成立。

Multiplying by the magnitude (size) makes sense — we’re used to that happening in regular multiplication ($3\times 4$ means you multiply $3$ by $4$’s size). The reason the angle addition works is more detailed, and we’ll save it for another time. (Curious? Find the sine and cosine addition formulas and compare them to how $(a+bi)\cdot (c+di)$ get multiplied out).
模长缩放的逻辑易于理解，实数乘法中 $3\times 4$ 本身就是对数值做倍数放大；辐角相加的推导过程较为冗长，本文不再展开。感兴趣可查阅正弦与余弦和角公式，对比 $(a+bi)\cdot (c+di)$ 的代数展开式。

Time for an example: let’s multiply $z=3+4i$ by itself. Before doing all the math, we know a few things:
举实例验证：将 $z=3+4i$ 做平方运算。正式计算前可先预判结果特征：

• The resulting magnitude will be $25$. $z$ has a magnitude of $5$, so $|z|\cdot |z|=25$.
  结果模长为 $25$：$z$ 模长为 $5$，因此 $|z|\cdot |z|=25$；

• The resulting angle will be above $90^{\circ }$. $3+4i$ is above $45^{\circ }$ (since $3+3i$ would be $45^{\circ }$), so twice that angle will be more than $90^{\circ }$.
  结果辐角大于 $90^{\circ }$：$3+4i$ 辐角大于 $45^{\circ }$（$(3+3i)$ 恰好为 $45^{\circ }$），两倍角度必然超过 $90^{\circ }$。

With our predictions on paper, we can do the math:
完成预判后执行代数展开计算：

$$(3+4i)\cdot (3+4i)=9+24i+16i^2=-7+24i$$

Time to check our results:
核验计算结果：

• Magnitude: $|-7+24i|=\sqrt{(-7{)}^2+24^2}=25$, which matches our guess.
  模长：$|-7+24i|=\sqrt{(-7{)}^2+24^2}=25$，与预判一致；
• Angle: Since $-7$ is negative and $24i$ is positive, we know we are going “backwards and up”, which means we’ve crossed $90^{\circ }$ (“straight up”). Getting geeky, we compute $\arctan (24/-7)=106.2^{\circ }$ (keeping in mind we’re in quadrant 2). This guess checks out too.
  辐角：实部 $-7$ 为负且虚部 $24$ 为正，对应第二象限，角度超过竖直向上的 $90^{\circ }$，精确计算可得 $\arctan (24/-7)=106.2^{\circ }$，预判成立。

Nice. While we can always do the math out, the intuition about rotations and scaling helps us check the result. If the resulting angle was less than $90^{\circ }$ (“forward and up”, for example), or the resulting magnitude not $25$, we’d know there was a mistake in our math.
完整代数计算固然可行，但旋转与缩放的几何直观可以快速校验对错。若算出辐角小于 $90^{\circ }$（例如位于右上方）或模长不等于 $25$，即可判定计算过程存在失误。

4.5 复数除法

Division is the opposite of multiplication, just like subtraction is the opposite of addition. When dividing complex numbers ($x$ divided by $y$), we:
除法为乘法的逆运算，对应关系等同于减法之于加法。复数 $x$ 除以 $y$ 遵循如下规则：

• Subtract angles $\mathrm{angle}(z)=\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$
  辐角做减法运算：$\mathrm{angle}(z)=\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$

• Divide by magnitude $|z|=|x|/|y|$
  模长做除法运算：$|z|=|x|/|y|$

Sounds good. Now let’s try to do it:
规则清晰，接下来实操演算如下式：

$$\frac{3+4i}{1+i}$$

Hrm. Where to start? How do we actually do the division? Dividing regular algebraic numbers gives me the creeps, let alone weirdness of $i$ (Mister mister! Didya know that $1/i=-i$? Just multiply both sides by $i$ and see for yourself! Eek.). Luckily there’s a shortcut.
直接开展复数除法缺少直观操作路径，即便实数分式除法都易出错，更何况引入虚数单位 $i$。补充小结论：$1/i=-i$，等式两侧同乘 $i$ 即可证明。下文引入共轭复数作为简化计算的方法。

4.5.1 共轭复数介绍

Our first goal of division is to subtract angles. How do we do this? Multiply by the opposite angle! This will “add” a negative angle, doing an angle subtraction.
除法需要实现辐角相减，实现方式为乘以一个辐角相反的复数，等价于叠加负角度，完成辐角抵消。

Instead of $z=a+bi$, think about a number $z^{\ast }=a-bi$, called the “complex conjugate”. It has the same real part, but is the “mirror image” in the imaginary dimension. The conjugate or “imaginary reflection” has the same magnitude, but the opposite angle!
对于复数 $z=a+bi$，定义其共轭复数为 $z^{\ast }=a-bi$。二者实部完全相同，虚部沿实轴镜像翻转。共轭复数模长与原复数相等，辐角互为相反数。

So, multiplying by $a-bi$ is the same as subtracting an angle. Neato.
因此乘以 $a-bi$ 等价于辐角做减法运算，该性质十分实用。

Complex conjugates are indicated by a star ($z^{\ast }$) or bar above the number — mathematicians love to argue about these notational conventions. Either way, the conjugate is the complex number with the imaginary part flipped:
共轭复数常用星号 $z^{\ast }$ 或变量上加横线标记，数学界对记号形式存在不同习惯，但根本规则统一：仅翻转虚部符号。

$$z=a+bi$$

Note that $b$ doesn’t have to be “negative”. If $z=3-4i$, then $z^{\ast }=3+4i$.
注意系数 $b$ 本身可正可负：若 $z=3-4i$，其共轭复数即为 $z^{\ast }=3+4i$。

4.5.2 与共轭复数相乘

What happens if you multiply by the conjugate? What is $z$ times $z^{\ast }$? Without thinking, think about this:
原复数与自身共轭复数相乘会得到什么结果？从几何角度推导：

$$z\cdot z^{\ast }=1\cdot z\cdot z^{\ast }$$

So we take $1$ (a real number), add $\mathrm{angle}(z)$, and add $\mathrm{angle}(z^{\ast })$. But this last angle is negative — it’s a subtraction! So our final result should be a real number, since we’ve canceled the angles. The number should be $|z{|}^2$ since we scaled by the size twice.
以实数 $1$ 作为基准，叠加 $z$ 的辐角与再叠加 $z^{\ast }$ 的负辐角，角度相互抵消，最终结果必然为实数；模长两次缩放，最终数值等于 $|z{|}^2$。

Now let’s do an example:
代入实例计算：

$$(3+4i)\cdot (3-4i)=9-16i^2=25$$

We got a real number, like we expected! The math fans can try the algebra also:
计算结果为实数，与预判一致。通用代数推导如下：

$$(a+bi)\cdot (a-bi)=a^2+abi-abi-b^2{i}^2=a^2+b^2$$

Tada! The result has no imaginary parts, and is the magnitude squared. Understanding complex conjugates as a “negative rotation” lets us predict these results in a different way.
展开式不含虚部，结果等于复数模长的平方。将共轭复数理解为反向旋转，可从几何层面预判该结论。

4.5.3 模长缩放修正

When multiplying by a conjugate $z^{\ast }$, we scale by the magnitude $|z^{\ast }|$. To reverse this effect we can divide by $|z|$, and to actually shrink by $|z|$ we have to divide again. All in all, we have to divide by $|z|\cdot |z|$ to get back to the original number after multiplying by the conjugate.
乘以共轭复数 $z^{\ast }$ 时，模长会被缩放 $|z^{\ast }|$ 倍。为抵消这一效应，可以除以 $|z|$；而要真正按 $|z|$ 缩小，则须再除一次。总而言之，在乘以共轭复数后，必须除以 $|z|\cdot |z|$ 才能还原原始数值。

4.5.4 复数除法完整演算

I’ve been sidestepping the division, and here’s the magic. If we want to do
前文铺垫完毕，对分式 $\frac{3+4i}{1+i}$ 做直观解法推导：

$$\frac{3+4i}{1+i}$$

We can approach it intuitively:
几何思路分步执行：

• Rotate by opposite angle: multiply by $(1-i)$ instead of $(1+i)$
  反向旋转：乘以分母共轭复数 $(1-i)$；

• Divide by magnitude squared: divide by $|1+i{|}^2=2$

• 缩放还原：除以分母模长平方 $|1+i{|}^2=2$。

The answer, using this approach, is:
直观解法计算过程：

$$\begin{array}{rl}\frac{3+4i}{1+i}& =(3+4i)\cdot (1-i)\cdot \frac{1}{2}\\ & =\left(3-3i+4i-4i^2\right)\cdot \frac{1}{2}\\ & =\frac{7}{2}+\frac{1}{2}i\end{array}$$

The more traditional “plug and chug” method is to multiply top and bottom by the complex conjugate:
教科书标准解法为分子分母同乘分母共轭复数：

$$\begin{array}{rl}\frac{3+4i}{1+i}& =\frac{(3+4i)(1-i)}{(1+i)(1-i)}\\ & =\frac{3-3i+4i-4i^2}{1-i^2}\\ & =\frac{7+i}{2}\end{array}$$

We’re traditionally taught to “just multiply both sides by the complex conjugate” without questioning what complex division really means. But not today.
传统教学大多直接套用分母有理化步骤，不解释背后几何意义，本文通过旋转缩放逻辑完成原理说明。

We know what’s happening: division is subtracting an angle and shrinking the magnitude. By multiplying top and bottom by the conjugate, we subtract by the angle of $(1-i)$, which happens to make the denominator a real number (it’s no coincidence, since it’s the exact opposite angle). We scaled both the top and bottom by the same amount, so the effects cancel. The result is to turn division into a multiplication in the numerator.
除法本质是辐角相减与模长相除。分子分母同乘共轭复数等价于完成辐角抵消，分母自动化为实数；分子分母同步乘以同一倍数，分式值保持不变，最终将除法转化为分子的复数乘法运算。

Both approaches work (you’re usually taught the second), but it’s nice to have one to double-check the other.
两种计算路径结果完全一致，常规学习以分母有理化为主，几何理解可作为结果校验手段。

4.6 共轭复数常用运算性质

Now that we understand the conjugate, there’s a few properties to consider:
掌握共轭定义后，两条常用运算性质如下：

$$\begin{gathered} (x+y{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }+y^{\ast } \\ (x\cdot y{)}^{\ast }=x^{\ast }\cdot y^{\ast } \end{gathered}$$

The first should make sense. Adding two numbers and “reflecting” (conjugating) the result, is the same as adding the reflections. Another way to think about it: sliding two numbers then taking the opposite, is the same as sliding both times in the opposite direction.
第一条性质易于直观理解：两复数相加后取共轭，等价于两复数分别取共轭再相加，对应两次平移后镜像翻转，等同于分别镜像再平移。

The second property is trickier. Sure, the algebra may work, but what’s the intuitive explanation?
第二条性质代数推导可直接验证，下文给出几何直观解释。

The result $(xy{)}^{\ast }$ means:
$(xy{)}^{\ast }$ 的几何含义：

• Multiply the magnitudes: $|x|\cdot |y|$
  模长：$|x|\cdot |y|$；
• Add the angles and take the conjugate (opposite): $\mathrm{angle}(x)+\mathrm{angle}(y)$ becomes $-\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$
  辐角：乘积辐角取反，即 $-\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$。

And $x^{\ast }$ times $y^{\ast }$ means:
$x^{\ast }\cdot y^{\ast }$ 的几何含义：

• Multiply the magnitudes: $|x|\cdot |y|$ (this is the same as above)
  模长：$|x|\cdot |y|$，与上式一致；

• Add the conjugate angles: $\mathrm{angle}(x^{\ast })+\mathrm{angle}(y^{\ast })=-\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$
  辐角：两个共轭复数负辐角相加，结果同样为 $-\mathrm{angle}(x)-\mathrm{angle}(y)$。

Aha! We get the same angle and magnitude in each case, and we didn’t have to jump into the traditional algebra explanation. Algebra is fine, but it isn’t always the most satisfying explanation.
二者模长与辐角完全等同，性质成立。代数推导可作为佐证，几何旋转视角更能体现内在逻辑。

4.7 应用小案例

The conjugate is a way to “undo” a rotation. Think about it this way:
共轭复数可用于撤销旋转操作，类比理解如下：

• I deposited $3, $10, $15.75 and $23.50 into my account. What transaction will cancel these out? To find the opposite: add them up, and multiply by $-1$.
  账户存入 $3、$10、$15.75 与 $23.50，冲销操作：总额求和后乘以 $-1$；
• I rotated a line by doing several multiplications: $(3+4i)$, $(1+i)$, and $(2+10i)$. What rotation will cancel these out? To find the opposite: multiply the complex numbers together, and take the conjugate of the result.
  多次复数乘法完成旋转：$(3+4i)$、$(1+i)$ 与 $(2+10i)$，撤销旋转操作：全部相乘后取整体共轭复数。

See the conjugate $z^{\ast }$ as a way to “cancel” the rotation effects of $z$, just like a negative number “cancels” the effects of addition. One caveat: with conjugates, you need to divide by $|z|\cdot |z|$ to remove the scaling effects as well.
共轭复数 $z^{\ast }$ 抵消 $z$ 的旋转效果，作用类似负数抵消加法偏移；唯一区别：共轭相乘会附带模长缩放，需要除以 $|z{|}^2$ 消除倍数影响。

5 复数的应用实例

5.1 旋转运算

We’re not going to wait until college physics to use imaginary numbers. Let’s try them out today. There’s much more to say about complex multiplication, but keep this in mind:
不必等到大学物理课程才使用虚数，以下即展示其应用。关于复数乘法尚有诸多内容可讨论，但须先记住：

• Multiplying by a complex number rotates by its angle
  乘以一个复数，相当于将原复数按该复数的角度旋转

Let’s take a look. Suppose I’m on a boat, with a heading of $3$ units East for every $4$ units North. I want to change my heading $45$ degrees counter-clockwise. What’s the new heading?
考察如下例子：假设在船上，航向为"每向正北行驶 $4$ 个单位，向正东行驶 $3$ 个单位"。现欲将航向逆时针旋转 $45$ 度，新的航向为何？

Some hotshot will say “That’s simple! Just take the sine, cosine, gobbledegook by the tangent… fluxsom the foobar… and…”. Crack. Sorry, did I break your calculator? Care to answer that question again?
有人可能会说：“这很简单！用正弦、余弦，再用正切计算……然后就能得到结果……” 然而这种方法计算繁琐。

Let’s try a simpler approach: we’re on a heading of $3+4i$ (whatever that angle is; we don’t really care), and want to rotate by $45$ degrees. Well, $45$ degrees is $1+i$ (perfect diagonal), so we can multiply by that amount!
采用更简洁的方法：航向可表示为 $3+4i$（其对应角度并不重要），现欲旋转 $45$ 度。而 $45$ 度对应的复数为 $1+i$（对角线方向），故只需将两个复数相乘：

Here’s the idea:
思路如下：

• Original heading: $3$ units East, $4$ units North = $3+4i$
  原航向：向正东 $3$ 个单位，向正北 $4$ 个单位 = $3+4i$
• Rotate counter-clockwise by $45$ degrees = multiply by $1+i$. (Here’s why multiplication, not addition, performs the rotation.)
  逆时针旋转 $45$ 度 = 乘以 $1+i$。（实现旋转的是乘法，而非加法。）

If we multiply them together we get:
两者相乘，结果如下：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(3+4i)\cdot (1+i)& =3+3i+4i+4i^2\\ & =3+7i+4(-1)\\ & =-1+7i\end{array}$$

So our new orientation is $1$ unit West ($-1$ East), and $7$ units North, which you could draw out and follow.
新的航向为"向正西 $1$ 个单位（即向东 $-1$ 个单位），向正北 $7$ 个单位"，可据此画出并遵循该方向。

But yowza! We found that out in $10$ seconds, without touching sine or cosine. There were no vectors, matrices, or keeping track what quadrant we are in. It was just arithmetic with a touch of algebra to cross-multiply. Imaginary numbers have the rotation rules baked in: it just works.
仅用时约 $10$ 秒即算出结果，全程未使用正弦或余弦，亦未使用向量、矩阵，更无需记录所在象限。仅为简单算术运算，辅以少量代数交叉相乘。虚数已将旋转规则"内置"：其运算直接有效。

Even better, the result is useful. We have a heading ($-1$, $7$) instead of an angle ($\arctan (7/-1)=98.13$, keeping in mind we’re in quadrant $2$). How, exactly, were you planning on drawing and following that angle? With the protractor you keep around?
此结果具有实用性。得到的是具体航向（$-1$，$7$），而非角度（$\arctan (7/-1)=98.13$ 度，且需记住在第二象限）。若使用角度，需用量角器画出 $98.13$ 度并依此行驶，颇为不便。

No, you’d convert it into cosine and sine ($-.14$ and $.99$), find a reasonable ratio between them (about $1$ to $7$), and sketch out the triangle. Complex numbers beat you to it, instantly, accurately, and without a calculator.
实际操作中，需将角度转换为余弦和正弦值（$-0.14$ 和 $0.99$），再找出大致比例（约为 $1:7$），然后画出三角形。而复数直接一步到位，迅速、准确，且无需计算器。

If you’re like me, you’ll find this use mind-blowing. And if you don’t, well, I’m afraid math doesn’t toot your horn. Sorry.
此用法颇为精妙。若未能体会，则数学或许并非其兴趣所在。

Trigonometry is great, but complex numbers can make ugly calculations simple (like calculating $\cos (a+b)$). This is just a preview; later articles will give you the full meal.
三角学固然重要，但复数能使复杂计算简化（如计算 $\cos (a+b)$）。此处仅为初步展示，后续文章将提供更深入的讨论。

Aside: Some people think “Hey, it’s not useful to have North/East headings instead of a degree angle to follow!”
补充说明：有人认为"用 ‘正北 / 正东’ 的航向，不如用角度方便"。

Really? Ok, look at your right hand. What’s the angle from the bottom of your pinky to the top of your index finger? Good luck figuring that out on your own.
观察右手：从小指根部到食指指尖的角度是多少？自行计算颇为困难。

With a heading, you can at least say “Oh, it’s $X$ inches across and $Y$ inches up” and have some chance of working with that bearing.
而用航向，至少可说"横向距离为 $X$ 英寸，纵向距离为 $Y$ 英寸"，从而更轻松地确定方位。

6 虚数与复数的代数价值

You ask why imaginary numbers are useful. As with most extensions of number systems, historically such generalizations were invented because they help to simplify certain phenomena in existing number systems. For example, negative numbers and fractions permit one to state in a single general form the quadratic equation and its solution (older solutions bifurcated into many cases, avoiding negative numbers and fractions). One of the primary reasons motivating the invention of complex numbers is that they serve to linearize what would otherwise be nonlinear phenomena — thus greatly simplifying many problems. Here are some examples.
关于虚数的用途，与大多数数系扩展一样，历史上发明此类推广是因为它们能简化现有数系中的某些复杂现象。例如，负数和分数使一元二次方程及其解能以统一的一般形式表示（早期解法为回避负数和分数，分成多种情况讨论）。而发明复数的主要原因之一，是它能将原本的"非线性"现象"线性化"——从而大幅简化许多问题。以下举例说明。

Consider the problem of representing integers as sums of squares $n=x^2+y^2$. Early solutions to this and related problems employed a complicated arithmetic of binary quadratic forms. Such arithmetic was quite intricate and often very nonintuitive, e.g. even the proof of associativity of composition of such forms was a tour de brute force, occupying pages of unmotivated computations in Gauss’ Disq. Arith. But this quadratic arithmetic of binary quadratic forms can be linearized. Indeed, by factorization $x^2+y^2=(x+yi)(x-yi)$, which allows us to view sums of squares as norms of Gaussian integers $x+yi$, $x,y\in \mathbb{Z}$. But just like the rational integers $\mathbb{Z}$, these “imaginary” integers have a Euclidean algorithm, so enjoy unique factorization into primes. By considering all the possible factorizations of $n$ in the Gaussian integers we obtain all the possible representations of $n$ as a sum of squares. In a similar way, “rational, real” arithmetic of integral quadratic forms becomes much simpler by passing to the “irrational” and/or “imaginary” arithmetic of quadratic number fields. This line of research led to the discovery of ideals and modules, fundamental linear structures at the heart of modern number theory and algebra. See [this answer and its links for a more precise description of the equivalence between quadratic forma and ideals].
考虑"将整数表示为两个平方和"的问题，即 $n=x^2+y^2$。早期解决此类问题时，采用复杂的"二元二次型算术"。此种算术非常繁琐且缺乏直观性，例如，“二次型合成的结合律"证明需大量复杂计算——在高斯《算术研究》中，该部分内容占数页，且计算动机不明确。但此种"二次型算术"可被"线性化”：通过因式分解 $x^2+y^2=(x+yi)(x-yi)$，可将"平方和"视为"高斯整数" $x+yi$（其中 $x,y\in \mathbb{Z}$）的范数。而这些"虚整数"与有理数整数 $\mathbb{Z}$ 一样，具有欧几里得算法，因此满足"唯一素因子分解"。通过考虑 $n$ 在高斯整数中的所有可能分解，即可得到 $n$ 表示为平方和的所有形式。类似地，将"整二次型的有理、实数算术"转化为"二次数域的无理、虚数算术"后，运算变得简单得多。这一研究方向最终促成了"理想"和"模"的发现——它们是现代数论和代数学中基础的"线性"结构。[关于二次型与理想的等价性，可参考 此回答 及其链接获取更精确的描述。]

Thus, by factorizing completely over $\mathbb{C}$, we have reduced the complicated nonlinear arithmetic of binary quadratic forms to the simpler, linear arithmetic of Gaussian integers, i.e. to the more familiar arithmetical structure of a unique factorization domain (in fact a Euclidean domain). Analogous linearization serves to simplify many problems. For example, when integrating or summing rational functions (quotients of polynomials), by factoring denominators over $\mathbb{C}$ (vs. $\mathbb{R}$) and taking partial fraction decompositions, the denominators are at worst powers of linear (vs. quadratic) polynomials — which greatly simplifies matters. More generally, when solving constant coefficient differential or difference equations (recurrences), by factoring their characteristic (operator) polynomials over $\mathbb{C}$, we reduce to solutions of linear (vs. quadratic) differential or difference equations. In the same way, there are many real problems (over $\mathbb{R}$) whose simplest solutions are obtained by an imaginary detour (over $\mathbb{C}$). Perhaps readers will mention more such problems in the comments.
因此，通过在 $\mathbb{C}$ 上进行完全因式分解，将复杂的"二元二次型非线性算术"简化为更简单的"高斯整数线性算术"——即更熟悉的"唯一分解整环（实际上是欧几里得整环）“算术结构。类似的线性化方法可简化许多其他问题。例如，在对有理函数（多项式的商）积分或求和时，若将分母在 $\mathbb{C}$（而非 $\mathbb{R}$）上因式分解并进行部分分式分解，分母最多为"一次多项式的幂”（而非"二次多项式"）——这大幅简化了计算。更一般地，在求解常系数微分方程或差分方程（递推关系）时，将其特征（算子）多项式在 $\mathbb{C}$ 上因式分解后，可将方程简化为"线性微分 / 差分方程"（而非"二次方程"）求解。同样，许多在 $\mathbb{R}$ 上的实际问题，其最简单的解法需要"绕道 $\mathbb{C}$"才能得到。

7 进一步的数系扩展

I’ve been asked in the comments to mention quaternions and octonions. These go (even further) beyond what the question is asking, so I won’t dwell on them, but the idea is: my friends and I are actually aliens from a multi-dimensional world and simply aren’t satisfied with a measly $2$-dimensional number system. By extending the principles from our so-called complex numbers we get systems which include copies of $\mathbb{C}$ and act in many ways like numbers, but now (unless we restrict ourselves to one of the copies of $\mathbb{C}$) the order in which we carry out our weird multi-dimensional symmetries does matter. But, with them, we can do lots of science.
有评论要求提及四元数与八元数。它们超出了本题范围，故不展开讨论，但其思路为：假设存在多维世界，对仅有 $2$ 维的复数系不满意。通过扩展复数的定义原则，可得到包含 $\mathbb{C}$ 副本的新数系，它们在很多方面均像"数"，但此时（除非限制在某个 $\mathbb{C}$ 副本内），多维对称操作的顺序会影响结果。然而，这些数系在科学研究中具有广泛用途。

I have also completely omitted any mention of ordinal numbers, because they fork off in a different direction straight after the naturals. We get some very exciting stuff out of these, but we don’t find $\mathbb{C}$ because it doesn’t have any natural order relation on it.
此外未提及序数，因其从自然数出发即走向另一方向。序数可衍生诸多有趣理论，但与 $\mathbb{C}$ 无关，因复数系不存在自然的序关系。

8 历史注记

The above succession of stages is not a historical account of how numbers of different types are discovered. I don’t claim to know an awful lot about the history of mathematics, but I know enough to know that the concept of a number evolved in different ways in different cultures, likely due to practical implications. In particular, it is very unlikely that complex numbers were devised geometrically as rotations-and-scalings — the needs of the time were algebraic and people were throwing away (perfectly valid) equations because they didn’t think $\sqrt{-1}$ could exist. Their geometric properties were discovered soon after.
以上数系的演进过程，并非不同类型数字的实际发现史。"数"的概念在不同文化中以不同方式演变，且很可能源于实际需求。尤其是复数，它不太可能是通过"旋转 + 缩放"的几何方式发明的——当时的需求是"代数层面"的：人们因不相信 $\sqrt{-1}$ 存在，而丢弃了一些（完全有效的）方程。复数的几何性质是在之后才被发现的。

However, this is roughly the sequence in which these number sets are (usually) constructed in ZF set theory and we have a nice sequence of inclusions
不过，这大致是 ZF 集合论中（通常）构造这些数集的顺序，且它们满足以下包含关系：

$$1\hookrightarrow \mathbb{N}\hookrightarrow \mathbb{Z}\hookrightarrow \mathbb{Q}\hookrightarrow \mathbb{R}\hookrightarrow \mathbb{C}$$

9 结语

That was a whirlwind tour of my basic insights. Take a look at the first chart — it should make sense now.
以上即为对复数基本理解的概述。回顾最初的参考表，现在应已能够理解。

There’s so much more to these beautiful, zany numbers, but my brain is tired. My goals were simple:
这些数字尚有诸多值得探索之处。本文目标很简单：

• Convince you that complex numbers were considered “crazy” but can be useful (just like negative numbers were)
  复数虽然曾被认为"荒谬"，但和负数一样，具有实用价值。

• Show how complex numbers can make certain problems easier, like rotations
  展示复数如何使某些问题（如旋转问题）变得更简单。

If I seem hot and bothered about this topic, there’s a reason. Imaginary numbers have been a bee in my bonnet for years— the lack of an intuitive insight frustrated me.
虚数曾困扰我多年——一直找不到直观的理解方式，这令人沮丧。

Now that I’ve finally had insights, I’m bursting to share them. But it frustrates me that you’re reading this on the blog of a wild-eyed lunatic, and not in a classroom. We suffocate our questions and “chug through” — because we don’t search for and share clean, intuitive insights. Egad.
现已理解，迫不及待欲分享。然而令人沮丧的是，我是在一个"狂热分子"的博客上读到这些内容，而 不是 在课堂上。人们总是压抑疑问，"硬着头皮"学——因未去寻找和分享清晰、直观的理解方式。

But better to light a candle than curse the darkness: here’s my thoughts, and one of you will shine a spotlight. Thinking we’ve “figured out” a topic like numbers is what keeps us in Roman Numeral land.
但与其抱怨黑暗，不如点亮蜡烛：以上即为我的思考，希望有人能在此基础上进一步深入。若认为已经"彻底搞懂"了数字这类主题，便会如困于罗马数字时代一样停滞不前。

I know, they’re still strange to me too. I try to put myself in the mind of the first person to discover zero.
复数对我而言亦仍显奇怪。我试着换位思考，想象第一个发现"零"的人当时的感受。

Zero is such a weird idea, having “something” represent “nothing”, and it eluded the Romans. Complex numbers are similar — it’s a new way of thinking. But both zero and complex numbers make math much easier. If we never adopted strange, new number systems, we’d still be counting on our fingers.
“用某个东西代表 ‘什么都没有’”，零的概念曾经也很奇怪，古罗马人一直无法理解。复数与此类似——它是一种新的思维方式。但零和复数均使数学变得更简单。若一直不接受这些新的数字系统，现在可能仍在掰手指计数。

I repeat this analogy because it’s so easy to start thinking that complex numbers aren’t “normal”. Let’s keep our mind open: in the future they’ll chuckle that complex numbers were once distrusted, even until the 2000’s.
反复使用此类比，因人们很容易觉得复数"不正常"。应保持开放的心态：未来的人们可能会觉得，直到 $21$ 世纪初还有人不信任复数，是件很可笑的事。

Carl Gauss, the famous mathematician, wrote:
著名数学家卡尔 · 高斯曾写道：

“Hätte man +1, -1, √-1 nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar ummögliche) Einheit, sondern etwa directe, inverse, laterale Einheit genannt, so hätte von einer solchen Dunklelheit kaum die Rede sein können.”

“If +1, -1, √-1 had not been called a positive, negative, imaginary (or even impossible) unit, but rather a direct, inverse, lateral unit, then there could hardly have been any talk of such obscurity.”
“如果人们没有把 $+1$、$-1$、$\sqrt{-1}$ 称为正单位、负单位、虚单位（甚至不可能单位），而是称为正向单位、反向单位、侧向单位，那么就不会有那么多关于 ‘晦涩难懂’ 的讨论了。”

The math here isn’t new, but I never realized why complex conjugates worked as they did. Why $a-bi$ and not $-a+bi$? Well, complex conjugates are not a random choice, but a mirror image from the imaginary perspective, with the exact opposite angle.
文中公式均为成熟数学结论，本文重点解释共轭复数的设计逻辑：选用 $a-bi$ 而非 $-(a+bi)$ 并非人为随机规定，本质是虚轴方向镜像翻转，实现辐角完全反向。

Seeing imaginary numbers as rotations gives us a new mindset to approach problems; the “plug and chug” formulas can make intuitive sense, even for a strange topic like complex numbers. Happy math.
将虚数视作复平面旋转操作，可以建立全新解题思维，让纯代入计算的公式拥有几何直观支撑，消解复数知识点的抽象感。祝学习顺利。

If you want more nitty-gritty, check out wikipedia, the Dr. Math discussion, or another argument on why imaginary numbers exist...
欲了解更多细节，可参阅 维基百科、数学博士论坛的讨论。

I’d be glad to know of more such resources; feel free to post any in the comments.
若有更多此类资源，欢迎分享。

---

How can one show that imaginary numbers really do exist?

如何证明虚数具备客观存在性？

One does it in exactly the same way one would show that fractions exist.
其证明逻辑与证明分数存在的推理范式完全一致。

Let’s look at a way to show that fractions exist. Of course, that’s something you know already; you don’t need a mathematical exposition to prove it to you. But the point of going through it is that exactly the same argument can be used to show that imaginary numbers exist. Having become convinced that the argument is a legitimate one by seeing it work in a familiar context, you should be more willing to accept it in the somewhat mysterious context of “imaginary” numbers.
我们先梳理分数存在性的完整证明过程。分数的存在性属于已知常识，无需额外数学推演予以佐证。完整拆解该论证的目的在于：完全同质的推导结构可直接迁移用于证明虚数的存在性。当在分数这一熟悉数学体系中验证论证逻辑自洽后，便更容易将其接纳并应用于相对抽象的"虚数"体系。

Argument that Fractions Exist / 分数存在性论证

Suppose the only things you knew about were the natural numbers ($1,2,3,\dots$), and you had to show that “three halves” exists. In other words, you need to show that there exists some number which, when doubled, gives you $3$. You could argue as follows:
假定认知仅局限于自然数集 N = { 1 , 2 , 3 , …   } \mathbb{N}=\{1,2,3,\dots\} N={1,2,3,…}，需要证明"二分之三"存在。等价命题：证明存在一个数，其乘以 $2$ 的运算结果等于 $3$。论证过程如下：

Granted, no such thing exists within the Natural Number System.
诚然，自然数体系内不存在满足该条件的元素。
 
However, there is a different number system in which such a thing does exist: the Rational Number System. The “numbers” in this different number system will be fractions: totally different objects from the natural numbers (they won’t represent sizes of sets; instead, they’ll represent ratios of sizes), but that doesn’t make them any less real.
但存在另一套容纳该元素的数系，即有理数系 $\mathbb{Q}$。有理数系内的元素为分数，与自然数属于不同数学客体：自然数用于表征集合基数，分数用于表征两个量的比值，客体定义的差异不影响其数学实在性。
 
Do fractions really exist? Yes. Do they really form a number system? Yes. Within this number system, is there a number which, when doubled, gives $3$? Yes. Therefore, “three halves” exists.
分数是否客观存在：是。分数是否可构成完备数系：是。该数系内是否存在两倍取值为 $3$ 的元素：是。综上可证 $\frac{3}{2}$ 存在。

Validity of the Argument / 论证有效性核验

To see that the three key answers (in the last paragraph of the argument) really are “yes”, let’s look at the questions one by one.
为验证上段三个判定结论均为肯定，逐项拆解核验。

Do fractions really exist? Yes; they’re just pairs of natural numbers. (Let’s just talk about positive fractions here, to make the discussion as simple as possible and avoid having to worry about things like the denominator being zero). Pairs of natural numbers certainly exist, so fractions exist. We write such a pair by writing the first number over the second number, e.g. $a/b$.
分数是否客观存在？ 存在。分数可定义为自然数有序对（本文仅讨论正分数，规避分母为 $0$ 的无意义情形）。自然数有序对具备存在性，因此分数存在，记为分式形式 $\frac{a}{b}$。

Do fractions really form a number system? Yes. A number system is just a collection of objects for which
分数是否构成合法数系？ 可以。数系的定义为满足以下三条规则的元素集合：

• there’s a definition of what it means for two objects to be equal,
  规定两个元素相等的判定准则；
• there is a rule for how to add two objects together and a rule for how to multiply two objects together (subtraction and division can be deduced from these, provided that all objects have corresponding negatives and some objects have corresponding reciprocals), and
  定义加法、乘法二元运算规则；若全体元素存在相反数、非零元素存在倒数，则减法、除法可由加减乘运算导出；
• these rules for addition and multiplication satisfy the familiar properties of arithmetic, such as commutativity (order doesn’t matter), associativity (in a sum of three of more terms, it doesn’t matter which two you add first, and likewise for products), and distributivity ($a(b+c)=ab+ac$).
  加法与乘法满足算术基本公理：交换律、结合律、分配律 $a(b+c)=ab+ac$。

Roughly speaking, any collection of objects that satisfies these properties is, by definition, a number system. (Strictly speaking, some of these properties need to be stated a little more precisely, but the rough statement is quite enough for our purposes!)
满足上述约束的集合即可定义为数系。严谨公理体系需附加前置条件，本文概括性表述已满足论证需求。

These properties are all satisfied by fractions. We have a definition of when two fractions are to be considered equal:
分数完全满足全部约束，分数相等判定规则：

$$\frac{a}{b}=\frac{c}{d}⟺ad=bc$$

We have a rule for adding two fractions:
分数加法运算：

$$\frac{a}{b}+\frac{c}{d}=\frac{ad+bc}{bd}$$

and a rule for multiplying two fractions:
分数乘法运算：

$$\frac{a}{b}\cdot \frac{c}{d}=\frac{ac}{bd}$$

One can check that these rules do indeed satisfy the familiar properties of arithmetic.
可严格核验，上述运算完全满足交换律、结合律、分配律。

Therefore, fractions form a number system.
因此分数构成完备数系。

Within this number system, is there an object which, when doubled, gives $3$? Yes. It is the fraction $\frac{3}{2}$. When you double it, you get the fraction $\frac{3}{1}$.
该数系内是否存在两倍等于 $3$ 的元素？ 存在，即 $\frac{3}{2}$，其二倍运算结果为 $\frac{3}{1}$。

Strictly speaking, $\frac{3}{1}$ is something different from the natural number $3$. After all, it’s a pair of natural numbers, $3$ and $1$ (representing the ratio “$3$ to $1$”), not a single natural number.
严格区分：$\frac{3}{1}$ 是自然数有序对 $(3,1)$，表征比值 $3:1$，与单个自然数 $3$ 属于不同客体。

However, fractions of the form $a/1$ behave identically to the way ordinary natural numbers $a$ behave. They add and multiply in exactly the same way that ordinary natural numbers do:
但形如 $\frac{a}{1}$ 的分数，算术运算行为与自然数 $a$ 完全同构：

$$\frac{a}{1}+\frac{b}{1}=\frac{a+b}{1},\frac{a}{1}\cdot \frac{b}{1}=\frac{ab}{1}$$

The “/1” just “comes along for the ride”.
分母 $1$ 仅为形式标记，不改变运算行为。

Since numbers are just abstract concepts anyway, and since natural numbers $a$ and fractions of the form $a/1$ are completely identical as far as their arithmetic behaviour is concerned, it is perfectly legitimate to view them as just two different representations of the same underlying concept.
数属于抽象数学概念，自然数 $a$ 与分数 $\frac{a}{1}$ 运算同构，可视为同一抽象内核的两种等价表达。

With this in mind, we can consider the fraction $\frac{3}{1}$ (the ratio “$3$ to $1$”) and the natural number “$3$” to be the same thing. This enables us to say that $\frac{3}{2}$, when doubled, gives $3$.
基于该等价约定，可将 $\frac{3}{1}$ 等同于自然数 $3$，由此得到结论：$2\cdot \frac{3}{2}=3$。

This completes the argument that “three halves” exists. Of course, that’s something you knew already; it’s obvious that fractions exist. But even though you already knew that fractions exist, and didn’t need this long argument proving it, the point of going through the details of the argument is that exactly the same argument can be used to show that imaginary numbers exist.
至此 $\frac{3}{2}$ 存在性证明闭环。分数存在为基础常识，冗长推演的目的在于：完全一致的论证框架可直接迁移至虚数存在性证明。

The argument that “imaginary” numbers exist is almost word-for-word identical to the above argument. So, being convinced that the above argument is a valid one, you should be better able to accept the argument that imaginary numbers exist.
虚数存在性论证与上文逐段范式对齐，认可本套逻辑的自洽性，即可顺利接纳虚数的推导过程。

---

Argument that Imaginary Numbers Exist / 虚数存在性论证

This argument is patterned after the above argument that fractions exist; you’ll probably find it helpful to open another window on your web browser and view the two of them side by side.
本论证完全复刻分数存在性的证明范式，建议双页对照阅读。

The issue is the existence of the mysterious quantity “$i$”, since imaginary numbers are just multiples of $i$. In other words, we want to see that there exists some number which, when squared, gives you $-1$. Here is such an argument:
论证对象为虚数单位 $i$ 的存在性，全体虚数均可写为实数与 $i$ 的乘积。等价命题：证明存在元素满足 $x^2=-1$，论证如下：

Granted, no such thing exists within any of the four familiar number systems (the Natural Number System, the Integers, the Rational Number System, or the Real Number System).
自然数集 $\mathbb{N}$、整数集 $\mathbb{Z}$、有理数集 $\mathbb{Q}$、实数集 $\mathbb{R}$ 四类常用数系中，均不存在平方等于 $-1$ 的元素。
 
However, there is a different number system in which such a thing does exist: the Complex Number System. The “numbers” in this different number system will be totally different objects from the familiar real numbers (they will in fact be pairs of real numbers), but that doesn’t make them any less real.
复数系 $\mathbb{C}$ 可容纳该元素。复数定义为实数有序对，与实数客体形式不同，但具备同等数学实在性。
 
Do complex numbers really exist? Yes. Do they really form a number system? Yes. Within this number system, is there a number which, when squared, gives $-1$? Yes. Therefore, $i$ exists.
复数客观存在：是；复数构成完备数系：是；复数系内存在平方为 $-1$ 的元素：是。综上可证虚数单位 $i$ 存在。

Validity of the Argument / 论证有效性核验

To see that the three key answers (in the last paragraph of the argument) really are “yes”, let’s look at the questions one by one.
逐项核验上段三个判定结论。

Do complex numbers really exist? Yes; we just define a complex number to be a pair of real numbers. Real numbers certainly exist, so pairs of them exist.
复数是否客观存在？ 存在。复数严格定义为实数有序对 $(a,b),a,b\in \mathbb{R}$，实数具备存在性，因此实数有序对存在。

Do complex numbers really form a number system? Yes. Remember that any collection of objects for which
复数是否构成合法数系？ 可以。满足以下条件的集合即为数系：

• there is a definition of what the objects are and when two objects are equal,
  明确元素定义与相等判定规则；
• there is a rule for how to add two objects,
  定义二元加法运算；
• there is a rule for how to multiply two objects, and
  定义二元乘法运算；
• these rules obey familiar arithmetic laws like commutativity, associativity, and distributivity,
  运算满足交换律、结合律、分配律。

is, by definition, a number system.

These properties are all satisfied by complex numbers.
复数满足全部约束条件。

We have a definition of when two complex numbers are to be considered equal: they are equal if and only if they are the same pair of real numbers.
复数相等判定：

$$(a,b)=(c,d)⟺a=c\text{且}b=d$$

We have a rule for adding two complex numbers (which, remember, are nothing more than pairs of real numbers):
复数加法规则：

$$(a,b)+(c,d)=(a+c,b+d)$$

and a rule for multiplying two complex numbers:
复数乘法规则：

$$(a,b)\cdot (c,d)=(ac-bd,ad+bc)$$

The rule for multiplication may look very strange, but there’s nothing wrong with that; one can still verify that these rules do indeed satisfy the familiar properties of arithmetic.
乘法表达式形式特殊，但可完整核验其满足全部算术基本公理。

Therefore, complex numbers form a number system.
因此复数构成完备数系 $\mathbb{C}$。

Within this number system, is there an object which, when squared, gives $-1$? Yes. It is the pair $(0,1)$. When you square it using the above rule of multiplication, you get
该数系内是否存在平方等于 $-1$ 的元素？ 存在，即有序对 $(0,1)$，代入乘法规则做平方运算：

$$\begin{array}{rl}(0,1)\cdot (0,1)& =(0\cdot 0-1\cdot 1,0\cdot 1+1\cdot 0)\\ & =(-1,0)\end{array}$$

Strictly speaking, the complex number $(-1,0)$ is something different from the real number $-1$. After all, it’s a pair of real numbers, $-1$ and $0$, not a single real number.
严格客体区分：$(-1,0)$ 是实数有序对，实数 $-1$ 是单个实数，二者形式不同。

However, complex numbers of the form $(a,0)$ behave identically to the way ordinary real numbers $a$ behave. They add and multiply in exactly the same way that ordinary real numbers do:
形如 $(a,0)$ 的复数与实数 $a$ 运算完全同构：

$$(a,0)+(b,0)=(a+b,0),(a,0)\cdot (b,0)=(ab,0)$$

The “,0” just “comes along for the ride”.
后缀分量 $0$ 仅为形式占位，不参与实质运算。

Since numbers are just abstract concepts anyway, and since real numbers $a$ and complex numbers of the form $(a,0)$ are completely identical as far as their arithmetic behaviour is concerned, it is perfectly legitimate to view them as just two different representations of the same underlying concept.
实数 $a$ 与复数 $(a,0)$ 运算同构，可约定为同一抽象量的两种等价表达。

With this in mind, we can consider the complex number $(-1,0)$ and the real number $-1$ to be the same thing (this may seem a little hard to swallow, but remember it is no different from saying that the fraction $3/1$ and the natural number $3$ are the same thing, something that we do all the time; it may be helpful to re-read the corresponding paragraph for fractions to see just how similar the two cases are).
据此约定 $(-1,0)\triangleq -1$，该等价约定与前文 $\frac{3}{1}\triangleq 3$ 逻辑完全一致。

This enables us to say that $(0,1)$, when squared, gives $-1$. Therefore, $i$ exists; it is merely the pair of numbers $(0,1)$ under the above rules for adding and multiplying.
由此得到结论：$(0,1{)}^2=-1$，虚数单位定义为 $i\triangleq (0,1)$，在复数加减乘运算规则下客观存在。

This page last updated: September 1, 1997
本页面最后修订日期：1997 年 9 月 1 日

Original Web Site Creator / Mathematical Content Developer: Philip Spencer
网站原始创建人 / 数学内容撰写：菲利普 · 斯宾塞

Current Network Coordinator and Contact Person: Any Wilk — mathnet@math.toronto.edu
现任运维负责人及联络人：安妮 · 威尔克，邮箱：mathnet@math.toronto.edu

---

Reference

• 虚数的意义 - 阮一峰的网络日志 阮一峰 2012 年 9 月 24 日
  https://ruanyifeng.com/blog/2012/09/imaginary_number.html
• definition - What are imaginary numbers? - 2012
  https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/199676/what-are-imaginary-numbers
• Answers and Explanations – Imaginary Numbers: How To Show They Exist - 1997
  https://www.math.toronto.edu/mathnet/answers/imagexist.html
• Imaginary Number – BetterExplained
  https://betterexplained.com/topics/imaginary-number/
  • A Visual, Intuitive Guide to Imaginary Numbers
    https://betterexplained.com/articles/a-visual-intuitive-guide-to-imaginary-numbers/
  • Intuitive Arithmetic With Complex Numbers – BetterExplained
    https://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-arithmetic-with-complex-numbers/