https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIs tpPXKWng >"Ther

Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 2

Anonymous
2016-01-12 03:23:38 Post No. 7777355
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: 9d08e45793ca46568474360ae9301f15.jpg (23 KB, 400x400) Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 03:23:38 Post No. 7777355 [Report]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIstpPXKWng

>"There are some superb papers written that in fact discount the idea that we should ever use j on the grounds that it conceals some structure that we could explain by another means"

Well, /sci/? Is there a better mathematical system out there that solves the same problems imaginary numbers do without resorting to imaginary numbers?

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-12 03:34:38 Post No.7777391
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 03:34:38 Post No.7777391 [Report]

>>7777355
who the fuck uses j instead of i for an imaginary number

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-12 03:36:52 Post No.7777404
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 03:36:52 Post No.7777404 [Report]

>>7777391
engineers

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:50:04 Post No.7777859
[Report] Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:50:04 Post No.7777859 [Report]

File: 7b21916fc10c6cd6bc95a887cc99fa18.png (1 KB, 245x92) Image search: [Google]

1 KB, 245x92

>>7777391
>o
>>not using i, j, and k
can you even quaternion?

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:52:41 Post No.7777862
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:52:41 Post No.7777862 [Report]

>>7777355
Imaginary numbers are tools. Complex numbers are really just 2x1 vectors of real numbers that multiply following a certain law. We just call i the vector (0,1)

>>

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:55:05 Post No.7777868
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-01-12 05:55:05 Post No.7777868 [Report]

You could just think of complex numbers as R[x]/<x^2 + 1>