/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11153808]

What's outside the complex numbers?

[Anonymous No.11153811]

>>11153808
God

[Anonymous No.11153813]

>>11153811
He's in the Imaginary segment.

[Anonymous No.11153825]

>>11153808
every number in the universe, complex or not, is just a function of (-1)^(i)^(x), where x denotes "where" your number is located.

So, the only number that lies off the plane of conceivable numbers is (-1)^(i)^(x), which, in its own definition, lies somewhere on the plane of conceivable numbers.

It is a paradox in an enigma in a mystery.

[Anonymous No.11153828]

>>11153808
>What's outside the complex numbers?
Quaternions

[Anonymous No.11153840]

>>11153808
What are imaginary numbers?

[Anonymous No.11153842]

>>11153808
more bullshit

[Anonymous No.11153852]

>>11153842
Anything useful is isomorphic to R, C, or H, so thankfully nobody cares about this bullshit.

Oh, and who the fuck denotes quaternions as Q.

[Anonymous No.11153885]

>>11153808
video game graphics

[Anonymous No.11153886]

>>11153842
[math] \displaystyle
\boxed{ \mathbb{T} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{S} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{O} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{H} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{C} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{R} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{Q} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{Z} \;
\boxed{ \mathbb{N}}}}}}}}}}
[/math]

[Anonymous No.11153907]

>>11153808
somedays I worry you can unplug the universe and existence

[Anonymous No.11153911]

>>11153842
im officially naming the 512th dimensional numbers as the cirnons

[Anonymous No.11153987]

>>11153852
Octonions is still a division algebra, after that it really falls apart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BZyds_KFWM&list=PLNxhIPHaOTRZMO1VjJcs7_3dgyJ2qU1yZ

[Anonymous No.11154140]

>>11153852
>Anything useful is isomorphic to R, C, or H
What is linear algebra?

[Anonymous No.11154160]

>>11153840
An entire branch of mathematics that spawned from the solution of x^2 + 1 which doesnt have any real roots. So the imaginary numbers are essentially what they sound like, "imaginary".

[Anonymous No.11154203]

>>11154160
>spawned from the solution of x^2 + 1
nope
x^5-5x+1=0 is the type
three real solutions
can't solve without i

[Anonymous No.11154208]

>>11154160
>spawned from the solution of x^2 + 1
nope
x^3-5x+1=0 is the type
three real solutions
can't solve without i

[Anonymous No.11154234]

>>11154208
>x^3-5x+1=0
>It doesn't use imaginary numbers.
Reminder that imaginary numbers are [math]i\mathbb{R}.[/math]
If it has a real part, it is not an imaginary number.

[Anonymous No.11154236]

>>11154234
complex numbers require imaginary numbers to understand

[Anonymous No.11154244]

>>11154236
Regardless, it is not incorrect to say that they spawned from the solution of x^2+1=0, since imaginary numbers are just a real constant times i.

[Anonymous No.11154247]

>>11154234
solve it then
put your money where your mouth is

[Anonymous No.11154292]

superduper complex numbers

[Anonymous No.11154352]

>>11153808
Another letters than i.

Also subgroups of irrational numbers are interesting thing.

[Anonymous No.11154418]

>>11154140
Even I know he referred to that one theorem about nice division algebras, learn some maths before posting in a math thread lol.

[Anonymous No.11154422]

>>11153808
1/0

[Anonymous No.11154437]

>>11154418
>Referring to some theorem you don't understand makes you smart.
Intelligence is not about showing that you can memorize theorems. He said something stupid, so why are you defending him?

[Anonymous No.11155113]

>>11153808
Just like complex numbers were invented (discovered) as a solution to an unsolvable problem, so is the solution to [math]\frac{\mathbb{x}}{0}[/math] the set that is "outside" the complex numbers
Quaternions and everything above them is a huge meme and about as valid as using a second Euclidean plane to indicate the second dimension. What quaternions are doing is just that - they're using a second complex plane to indicate rotation in the 3rd dimension and humanity refuses to even think of the idea that the square root of -1 isn't the last frontier of mathematics because implying that there's something of equivalent magnitude out there waiting to be discovered pretty much renders any current effort absolutely useless and triggers anyone who's dumped a decade into this subject with the belief that he's coming out as cutting edge in this field for the rest of his life. Imagine the resistance of academia back then when Euler began applying [math]i[/math] in his solutions, it's about the same thing except our Euler hasn't come up with the solution yet and he might as well not even be "our" Euler but one from a century later, depending on how stuck up we are with enforcing the standard dogma.

[Anonymous No.11155138]

>>11154140
>what is frobenius thm
You are either retarded or undegrad

[Anonymous No.11155144]

>>11153808
Those venn diagrams are always misleadingly drawn, the irrational subset of real number should cover almost the whole set

[Anonymous No.11155197]

>>11155138
>>11154437

[Anonymous No.11155198]

>>11153808
test

[Anonymous No.11155271]

>>11153852
>Anything useful is isomorphic to R, C, or H
what the proof of this

[Anonymous No.11155399]

>>11153907
Don't worry; you wouldn't know :).

[Anonymous No.11156684]

>>11155271
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frobenius_theorem_(real_division_algebras)

The proof is very simple, surprisingly.

[Anonymous No.11156763]

>>11156684
>Useful.
Do you fuckwits actually not know what words mean?

[Anonymous No.11157297]

>>11154244
But they actually spawned from attempts to solve third degree polynomials. Stop running your mouth.

[Anonymous No.11157428]

>>11157297
It's a nitpick regarding the definition of "spawn".
Historically, it is indeed that they spawned from attempts to solve third degree polynomials.
But one can also say that they spawn from the definition of i being a solution to x^2+1=0. In this case, "spawn" meaning something along the lines of following through with the implications of such a definition, so we see that multiplying i by any real number, we get an imaginary number.
Learn to expand your mind.

[Anonymous No.11157465]

>>11153825
t. /lit/