My question is pretty simple. I've been trying to read a pretty introductory text on Clifford algebras, and I encountered how they define the "argument" of a quaternion as an ordered quadruple representing the components of the noramlized quaternion. Now, in $\mathbb{C}$, we have this map $\arg : \mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 0 \} \to [0, 2 \pi)$ such that \begin{align*} \arg (z_{1} z_{2}) & = \arg(z_{1}) + \arg(z_{2}) , \\ \arg(z_{1}) = \arg(z_{2}) & \iff \frac{z_{1}}{z_{2}} \in \mathbb{R}_{ > 0 } . \end{align*} So my question is, is there a map $$\arg' : \mathbb{H} \to [0, 2 \pi)^{2}$$ such that, again, $\arg'$ is additive under multiplication, $$\arg'(z_{1}) = \arg'(z_{2}) \iff \frac{z_{1}}{z_{2}} \in \mathbb{R}_{ > 0 }$$ and $$\arg' |_{\mathbb{C}} = (\arg, 0) ?$$
2026-03-25 19:04:26.1774465466
The "argument" of a quaternion
710 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in COMPLEX-ANALYSIS
- Minkowski functional of balanced domain with smooth boundary
- limit points at infinity
- conformal mapping and rational function
- orientation of circle in complex plane
- If $u+v = \frac{2 \sin 2x}{e^{2y}+e^{-2y}-2 \cos 2x}$ then find corresponding analytical function $f(z)=u+iv$
- Is there a trigonometric identity that implies the Riemann Hypothesis?
- order of zero of modular form from it's expansion at infinity
- How to get to $\frac{1}{2\pi i} \oint_C \frac{f'(z)}{f(z)} \, dz =n_0-n_p$ from Cauchy's residue theorem?
- If $g(z)$ is analytic function, and $g(z)=O(|z|)$ and g(z) is never zero then show that g(z) is constant.
- Radius of convergence of Taylor series of a function of real variable
Related Questions in QUATERNIONS
- Intuition behind quaternion multiplication with zero scalar
- Universal cover $\mathbb{S}^3 \rightarrow SO(3)$ through Quaternions.
- Variance of a set of quaternions?
- Finding the Euler angle/axis from a 2 axes rotation but that lies on the original 2 axes' plane
- How many different quaternions $q$ are in a satisfying equation $q^2 = 1$?
- Dual quaternions displacement
- Why quaternions is a group?
- Why does the real part of quaternion conjugation with a pure quaternion stay 0?
- Why does the multiplication in a division algebra depends on every component?
- derive quaternion from rotation matrix, via eigenvector
Related Questions in HYPERCOMPLEX-NUMBERS
- Hyper complex number $e_{16}$ had a zero divisor.
- Is it possible to plug hypercomplex numbers into the Riemann Zeta function?
- Rotation around a whole sphere by multiplying a single hypercomplex number forever?
- A simple Variation on the Imaginary Unit i
- Using dual complex numbers for combined rotation and translation
- $\epsilon \otimes 1 + 1 \otimes \epsilon$ is a nilcube in $\mathbb R[\epsilon] \otimes \mathbb R[\epsilon]$. What does that mean intuitively?
- Why intuitively do the quaternions satisfy the mixture of geometric and algebraic properties that they do?
- Construction of Hyper-Complex Numbers
- How quickly can we multiply hypercomplexes?
- Is split-complex $j=i+2\epsilon$?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
First, note that the argument function $$\def\wtarg{\widetilde{\text{arg}}} \def\wtexp{\widetilde{\text{exp}}} \arg: \Bbb C - \{0\} \to [0, 2\pi)$$ as written does not actually satisfying the additive identity $$\arg (z w) = \arg z + \arg w:$$ if we take $z = w = -1$, then the l.h.s. is $0$ but the r.h.s. is $2 \pi$. The best we can ask for is that this identity hold true modulo $2 \pi$, that is, that $$\arg (z w) = \arg z + \arg w \bmod 2 \pi,$$ and this holds (more or less by definition) for any branch of the argument function.
The argument as a normalization map
Complex case
If, as OP specified in the comments, we compose this map with the canonical projection $\Bbb R \to \Bbb R / 2 \pi \Bbb Z$ and invoke the identification $\Bbb R / 2 \pi \Bbb Z \leftrightarrow \Bbb S^1$ given by $x + 2 \pi \Bbb Z \leftrightarrow e^{ix}$, we get the map $$\wtarg: \Bbb C - \{0\} \to \Bbb S^1$$ defined by $$\wtarg(z) := \frac{z}{|z|}.$$ When we view the argument this way, the additivity criterion becomes the familiar group homomorphism condition, $$\wtarg(z w) = \wtarg z \,\wtarg w.$$
Quaternionic case
Working instead with $\Bbb H$ leads to an analogous "argument" function $\wtarg': \Bbb H - \{0\} \to \Bbb S^3$ defined formally by the same rule as above. (Note that the codomain here is not $\Bbb S^1 \times \Bbb S^1$ but rather $\Bbb S^3$, which in particular has dimension $3$.) Applying this map gives exactly the "ordered quadruple representing the components of the normalized quaternion" in the text OP mentions. This map satisfies the desired conditions:
We can view $\Bbb C$ as a subset of $\Bbb H$ in the usual way, and since $\wtarg$ and $\wtarg'$ are given by the same rule, we have the desired identity
In both cases, the argument map so viewed is perhaps not so interesting: It's simply the map that assigns to a nonzero vector the unit vector pointing in the same direction, and so it makes sense for any normed vector space.
The argument as a branch cut
Complex case
The situation where we do not pass to the appropriate quotient, and so work with what (at least in the complex setting) are called branch cuts of the argument function, e.g., $\arg$, is a good deal subtler. One way to view such functions that extends cleanly to the quaternionic setting is as follows: The restriction of the exponential map to the imaginary axis is a map $$\exp\vert_{i \Bbb R} : i \Bbb R \to \Bbb S^1$$ (via the identification $T_I \Bbb S^1 \leftrightarrow i \Bbb R$, this is precisely the exponential map of $\Bbb S^1$ regarded as a Lie group), and more or less by definition we can produce a branch cut of the argument function by taking (by convention, the imaginary part of) a right inverse for this function; this is essentially the restriction of the complex logarithm to the unit circle. If we restrict the map to $i \cdot [0, 2\pi)$, we get a bijection $\exp\vert_{i \cdot [0, 2 \pi)}: i \cdot [0, 2\pi) \to \Bbb S^1$, and by construction we have $$\arg z = \frac{1}{i} (\exp\vert_{i \cdot [0, 2\pi)})^{-1} (\wtarg z).$$
Quaternionic case
Similarly, the quaternionic exponential map $\wtexp: \Bbb H \to \Bbb H - \{0\}$ restricts to a map $\wtexp\vert_{\Bbb I} : \Bbb I \to \Bbb S^3$ (again, the exponential map of $\Bbb S^3$ regarded as a Lie group), and we can define a (branch $\arg'$ of the) (quaternionic) argument function to be a right inverse for this map. Here, $\Bbb I$ is the subspace $\langle i, j, k \rangle$ of the imaginary elements of $\Bbb H$.
Such a map $\arg'$, however, does not behave as well as its complex analogue $\arg$. We cannot expect an additivity property $$\arg' (q r) = \arg' q + \arg' r \bmod X$$ to hold for any lattice $X \subset \Bbb I$, in short because $\Bbb H$ is not commutative.
We can, however, produce an analogous condition that does hold for $q, r$ such that $\wtarg' q, \wtarg' r$ are close enough to $1$ (at least, provided that we choose our right inverse so that its domain includes an open neighborhood of $0$): Translating the Baker-Campell-Hausdorff Formula (and passing through the map $\wtarg'$) gives the identity $$\arg' (q r) = \arg' q + \arg' r + \frac{1}{2} [\arg' q, \arg' r] + \cdots,$$ where $$[a, b] := a b - b a$$ is the usual commutator (in this case, the quadratic correction term $\frac{1}{2} [\arg' q, \arg' r]$ in the expansion could be written as $\arg' q \times \arg' r$, where $\times$ is the usual cross product on $\Bbb I \cong \Bbb R^3$), and $\cdots$ denotes a particular remainder that depends on $\arg' q, \arg' r$ to third and higher order. (All of these higher-order terms are also brackets, so we can see the complex additivity identity as a special case of this general formula for which all of the bracket terms disappear, because $\Bbb S^1$ is commutative.)
On the other hand, a suitable map $\arg'$ so constructed does satisfy the other two conditions, namely that (a) $\arg' q = \arg' r$ iff $q$ and $r$ are positive multiples of one another, and (b) the restriction of $\arg'$ to $\Bbb C - \{0\}$ defines an argument function for $\Bbb C$ as defined above.