When did /sci/ turn against complex numbers?

[Anonymous No.16114923]

It is increasingly common to see anti-complex sentiments on /sci/. When, why and how did this phenomenon start?

[Cult of Passion No.16114926]

>>16114923
Its like "base-sqrt" or something, neat.
>When, why and how did this phenomenon start?
Changes in Mathatical approaches happen from time to time, usually a field will discover a new field and maintain the same perspective, only for it to be superseded by a new mode of thought on the same level of reality.

SQUARE root, but it can be measured on other paradigms.

[Anonymous No.16114927]

>>16114926
I didn't give permission for boring schizolarping neurotypicals to reply to my thread.

[Anonymous No.16114928]

>>16114923
>When, why and how did this phenomenon start?
Since the 1500s /sci/ has been dunking on imaginary numbers

[Cult of Passion No.16114929]

>>16114927
Dont LARP at me.

What is "i"? I calculated Pi in the same fashion, and have Phi and others in the past.

This is related to Cognition/Phenomenology.

[Cult of Passion No.16114932]

>>16114927
Its also why fields like Set/Type/Knot/Combinatorics/Number Theory and many others became popular, a generalized perspective of Applied Maths, what was used for my Theory works the most.

Laterally applicable to CompSci as well as Physics as well Pure Math, Biology/Psychology to but thats too abstract and high of a perspective for most, requiring an "above the self" view.

[Cult of Passion No.16114936]

>>16114932
>Biology/Psychology
Need some Statistics/Probabilities/Hyperbolic-Hyper-Dimensional Grometries as well as a heavy background in Evolutionary Biology for the Time Maths of all of Life, not a 2-D or 3-D mapping, but 3.5-D at minimum for Molecular Biology, if not higher considering BioPhysics, but thats a Dymamic variable, not concrete like Molecular Signitures and very subtle.

[Cult of Passion No.16114938]

>>16114923
All of that is DIRECTLY connected to why some maths rise and some fall.

People get defensive over it but thats specialization, double edged if youre mot careful.

[Anonymous No.16114981]

>>16114923
Who gives a fuck about them? Complex numbers are very elegant to use in engineering, where, due to linearity of the problem and fourier transform you can consider just a single harmonic, don't give a fuck about its frequency value because it doesn't change throughout the problem, so you can work just with amplitude and phase and represent it with a complex number.

[Anonymous No.16114982]

Even more bafflingly, I have seen (multiple times!) people here refer to the quaternions as more "honest" and "valid" than the complex numbers. What gives?

[Cult of Passion No.16115008]

>>16114982
>quaternions
>Combinatorics/Number Theory
As you can see, tools within tools, wheels within wheels.

[Anonymous No.16115020]

>>16114923
the standing order is to make everyone here dumber. that's why.

[Cult of Passion No.16115027]

>>16115020
Correct.

Klown World was turning upside the sand counter of humanity to start anew. The sun rose again, turning leaves to it or dont.

[Anonymous No.16115035]

>>16115027
The monkey is the hunter of the spirits, there's a monkey type for every species on Earth, even one that's specific to man.

[Anonymous No.16115037]

>>16115035
In case I can't do with you, can you become the target of my sky or any room as well as what you are now?

[Anonymous No.16115056]

>>16114981
>very elegant
You're making them sound even worse than they already are

[Cult of Passion No.16115059]

>>16115037
>become the target of my sky
From the void?
>or any room as well as what you are now?
Ask the Tree.

The perspective to view Maths in radically different ways cant be expressed in Mathematical Notation, as thats predicated on a unified perspective (for cross language communications).

[Anonymous No.16115065]

>>16115059
I've just worked out that all I have is the internal nature of my heart(i.e I can hold par with my heart). I'm going in now, and I'm trying to see what I can do. I'll do my best to see through blindness to learn anything about this process. Wish me luck.

[Anonymous No.16115066]

>>16114923
a retard(although vocal) does not a board make, but still, don't worry, non-retarded anons do know that complex numbers are good

[Anonymous No.16115068]

>>16114982
it's literally just one retard

[Anonymous No.16115070]

I gather I can make more than one process in my heart. So:

1. Parity
2. Become.
3. Protrude.
4. Capillary.

This is as far as I've got blindly and dumbly. Let's see if I can talk/do

[Anonymous No.16115072]

>>16115070
go back
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.16115074]

This is sort of stuff that's dealing with you're most end-state processing such as you're restricted psychologically totally, the mentality you can barely produce has a little element of control. It's this control that I'm trying to use. Deep want and such

[Anonymous No.16115156]

>>16114982
Qiarternions are what Maxwell used to solve Maxwell equations

[Anonymous No.16115238]

I stopped caring about math when I was introduced to the concept of imaginary numbers. What a crock of shit. If your equation can only be solved by inventing numbers that can't exist, like some kind of math deity , then you are fucking wrong and the math is flawed. Same for algebra solutions that basically say "the correct answer is whatever the correct answer is". Thats what the math said transcribed to words but god forbid if i wrote in down in english instead of the ancient math runes the teacher word mark me wrong.

Math is logical and numbers never lie my ass. Math is just as flawed as any other human construct.

[Anonymous No.16115293]

Complex """numbers""" are simply ungeometric. It may be legitimate to regard them as a Clifford algebra acting via representations on a _real_ space to play with rotations. But there is no such thing as "complex functions" or "complex geometry". Just remember that a "complex line bundle" or a "Riemann surface" or a "complex algebraic variety of dimension 1" are NEVER 1-dimensional objects. Geometrically they are planes, 2-d surfaces. Any fallaciously suggested intuition calling these objects 1-dimensional is an intentional scam. Same goes for "holomorphic" functions. Of what use is a class of functions whose globally bounded instances are limited to constant functions? What is a "complex function" anyway? Try to picture it. Best thing you can do is plot heat maps of the real and imaginary part separately, with absolutely no indication anymore of its alleged "complex" geometry. A peak humiliation ritual is when they talk about actual real geometric objects and then pretend these to be complex. Like a symplectic manifold for example. Symplectic manifolds are the phase space for classical mechanics. Positions and momenta are _real_ variables. "Complex" bullshit has absolutely no place there. Same goes for the so called Clifford torus. A torus is a hecking donut. A 2-d _real_ surface embedded in 3-d _real_ space. But complex number worshippers want to tell you a torus is "actually" a submanifold of C^2, i.e. in 4-d space. What a load of ridiculous garbage. "Complex numbers" belong in the same category of modern brainwashing like "her penis" or "eat the bugs".

[Anonymous No.16115301]

>>16115293
>ungeometric
>the 2d plane is ungeometric
go back to preschool, you need to start all over

[Anonymous No.16115305]

>>16115301
Then you agree with me. Regarding a _real_ 2-d plane as a "complex 1-d line" is absurd and anti-geometric. It's a perversion introduced by algebraists disconnected from physical reality.

[Cult of Passion No.16115315]

>>16115305
>complex 1-d line
I understood this, as a pair of vectors in total, no?

And use vortex maths for a torus to proportionally project its 4-D space not shown, and is a means of meauring something with theoretically infinite dynamic projection if uneffected by external sources, like the planet or the sun.

Please, continue with your talk.

[Anonymous No.16115321]

I stopped caring them realising in physics
A*e^(ix)
is just lazy man's
A*cos(x)

[Anonymous No.16115403]

>>16114982
If I had to guess, because no one treats them like they represent an actual number, whereas complex numbers are usually treated by some people with soifaces like they actually represent 'numbers' in the reals sense -- when they aren't. They are a different algebra. But the crux is really the term "number". If complex numbers were called something like numberplus, which would also include the quaternions, then I wouldn't have a problem (by this paradigm, reals would both be numberpluses, but also just 'numbers', and they'd be the only thing that actually are 'numbers').

In a better universe, C is called something like "Complex solution space" or something.

[Cult of Passion No.16115419]

>>16115403
>Complex
Trivial.

[Anonymous No.16115498]

All these threads are a single guy who was filtered by complex numbers in high school.

[Anonymous No.16115555]

>>16115498
In highschool I used to be one of you. I felt all pseudointellectual for knowing about complex numbers and raised my hand in calculus class to proudly contradict the teacher when she said "you can't take the square root of a negative". In university I took a class on complex analysis. It just felt natural - if complex numbers exist then why shouldn't you do calculus with them? Slowly I learned how rotten the "complex number" ideology actually is - morally and epistemologically wrong. Complex geometry has nothing to do with geometry. Neither does algebraic geometry over the field of "complex numbers". Algebraic geometry has its merit, e.g. in cryptography, as long as it's done over finite fields or over the p-adics. But over the "'complex numbers" it's utter bullshit. Have you ever seen these pictures of elliptic curves as they are usually shown for intuition, for example in the wiki article? Well, that's not what an elliptic curve looks like at all. That's only the part that can be computed solely with real numbers. A full "elliptic curve" over the "complex numbers" is neither elliptic nor a curve. It's a weirdly twisted bullshit, not even necessarily connected, 2-d plane. Go tell me again how this is supposed to be useful for geometry.

[Anonymous No.16115903]

>>16114923
99% of the time you see an "i" it should really be an exterior product of basis vectors which dot product to -1, for example the basis bivector in 2D.

[Anonymous No.16115913]

>>16115403
Complex numbers are as much actual numbers as negatives. Whereas -1 is (1, 180°), i is (1, 90°).

[Anonymous No.16116565]

>>16114923
When /pol/ failed as a containment board

[Anonymous No.16116622]

>>16115403
>treated ... like they actually represent 'numbers' in the reals sense
As in they obey the field axioms? That's all a number is, it's something that obeys those axioms. Numbers are the things that do the representing, complex numbers represent rotations. Real numbers represent continuous quantities. Natural numbers are a reflection of our foolish belief in distinct subspaces (The equation 1+1=2 is foolish because it's impossible to have 1 and 1 coexist and not be 2 by virtue of their simultaneous existence. But a boy can dream!)

[Anonymous No.16116669]

>>16115913
Neither that are truly found in nature.
I believe in real positive R+ . I don't really have nothing against 0 so it believe in R0+.

[Anonymous No.16117829]

>>16115238
>filtered by nomenclature
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtIsYbYdzCI

[Anonymous No.16118011]

>>16117829
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You're fucking dead, kiddo.