[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 37 KB, 426x421, bush laughing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951779 No.3951779 [Reply] [Original]

Hey mathfags: I say imaginary numbers are just a cute little conceptual shortcut with no actual basis in reality. Disagree? Then riddle me this: is there a single fact pertaining to the physical world that can be proved with imaginary numbers but can't be proved without them?

>> No.3951788

>>3951779

>is there a single fact pertaining to the physical world that can be proved with imaginary numbers but can't be proved without them?

Yes.

>> No.3951794

>>3951779
hello, you're probably an idiot so let me explain this in a simple way

>> No.3951822

I bet you think irrational numbers are useless too, don't you?

>> No.3951824

>>3951822
there name already says their irrational
how can that be useful?

>> No.3951841

>>3951824

>there name already says their irrational
>there
>their

Elementary School called.
They want you back, immediately.

>> No.3951858

electrotechnic stuff uses complex numbers.

They don't have an actual basis in reality, just as graphs don't.
Graphs are a thing we made up.
But guess what, we use them all the time in physics.

Mathematics is a tool to study physics in a scientific and quantitative way.

>> No.3951864

>>3951779
>Then riddle me this: is there a single fact pertaining to the physical world that can be proved with imaginary numbers but can't be proved without them?
If it werent for imaginary numbers you wont be able to use your computer to "troll" sci.

>> No.3951873
File: 411 KB, 500x281, tumblr_ls5aaqXFGY1r0tml9o1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951873

Let a,b be real.
Since the fields with elements z=a+ib and Z={{a,-b},{b,a}} (2x2 matrix) are isomorphic, "believing" in complex numbers is not more far fetched then believing in matrices.

>> No.3951878

someone's never quantum mechaniced

>> No.3951884
File: 27 KB, 396x349, this_thread_is_bad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951884

>>3951779
>Someone doesn't understand how electronics work

>> No.3951887
File: 93 KB, 500x500, troll.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951887

>>3951779
>Pic: Stupidest president ever
>OP: Stupidest Anon ever

>> No.3951891

sage with a picture.
ishygddt

>> No.3951892

>>3951779
The wavefunction is complex.
One could argue that no mathematics has basis in reality; it's just useful for interpreting it.

>> No.3951899

> Doesn't know quantum mechanics or the applications of complex analysis
> 2011

>> No.3951902

>>3951892
Why is the wave function complex?
I don't see why a wave shouldn't be described with real numbers only.

>> No.3951908
File: 60 KB, 600x600, youre-fucking-retarded.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951908

>>3951902

>> No.3951921
File: 480 KB, 1600x1091, c3a_sarah_young_20.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951921

>>3951902
Complex wavefuntion => theory matches observation/experimentation, able to predict and develop new theories and technologies. CORRESPONDS TO REALITY

Not a complex wavefunction => NO PREDICTEVE POWER, DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO REALITY

>> No.3951922
File: 29 KB, 425x301, OP is a fag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3951922

>>3951891

Saging with a picture is a time-honored activity, why is your ass so pained?

>> No.3951948

>>3951921
Wat?
But we don't observe complex numbers in nature.

>> No.3951975

>>3951948
yes we do.
ie : wavefunction

>> No.3951986

>>3951975
>derp

Seriously, can anyone here explain the need for a complex wave function?
I'm a retard who doesn't know shit about physics and I don't want to read wikipedia.

>> No.3952374

>>3951779
describe how AC current works without imaginary numbers or use of the complex plane.

>> No.3952400

>>3951986
see
>>3951921

We need to use complex numbers because it's the only way we have of making it work.

>> No.3952403

calculate stuff with imaginary numbers, leave imaginary part out, profit!

ima be calculating dem derivatives of sine and cosine all day long using eulers identity. fuck yerp

>> No.3952404

I wish the mathematicians who had invented complex numbers hadn't referred to them as "imaginary".

>> No.3952410

>>3952404
Of course by "invent," I mean develop.

Some fucking pedant on this board would probably get on me about that.

>> No.3952418

>>3951921
There are lots of non-complex wavefunctions in quantum mechanics.

S and P orbitals are real, for example.

>> No.3952427

Transcendentals are the dark matter of mathematics. Imaginary numbers are the dark energy.

MADE
UP

>> No.3952436

>>3952374
looks like some doofus has never heard of trigonometric functions

>> No.3952438

>>3951779
> is there a single fact pertaining to the physical world that can be proved with imaginary numbers but can't be proved without them?
Yes. In order to calculate the shape required to generate the lifting force of an aircraft's wing, it can only be graphed using imaginary numbers.

>> No.3952443

>>3952436
turns out that the functions lead to imaginary numbers which is a huge deal about electronics!

>> No.3952442

'God made the natural numbers, man invented the rest'

It doesn't make them any less valid. Complex analysis can solve real integrals and the real and imaginary part of an analytic function satisfy laplace's equation, among many other applications

>> No.3952461

>>3952443
Portip: trigonometric functiones existed centuries before complex numbers.

You don't need complex numbers to understand what a unit circle or a power series is.

>> No.3952474

>>3952461
Yes, but it makes explaining AC so much simpler, helps quantify multi phase power, generator output, and physics easier. (and didn't AC come out post imaginary numbers anyway!)

>> No.3952497

>>3952474
The fact is you could still combine trigonometric fucntions if you wanted., and you implied you couldn't .

Cry more, bitch-nigga

>> No.3953987
File: 28 KB, 485x329, bump1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3953987

>> No.3954009

>>3952404

He didn't.

Descartes called them imaginary, because he thought the idea was retarded. The name stuck.

>> No.3954013

>>3951779

Hey OP. I say negative numbers are just a cute little conceptual shortcut with no actual basis in reality. Disagree? Then riddle me this: is there a single fact pertaining to the physical world that can be proved with negative numbers but can't be proved without them?

>> No.3954020

The only number is 1

>> No.3954025

>>3952427
except pi. Pi is the exception that proves the rule.
Inb4 some idiot thinks "e" exists

>> No.3954059

>>3952427

All of mathematics is MADE UP.

That's, you know. The whole bloody point.