"The true metaphysics of the square root negative 1 remains elusive." - C.F. Gauss

[Into the Night]

So now you’re a psychiatrist?

Obviously not. He's bullshitting again.

If so you should realize it’s unethical to diagnose without an in person evaluation.
If not then you’re doing your usual rant about how shmart you are compared to the rest of the world.

Bingo.

No one is trying to score points against you. They’re just calling it like it is. What is it you’re trying to prove on this forum?
I think I know. In reality nobody wants anything to do with you. Hence your bestie is Dutch who is incapable of forming real life relationships, which is why he’s here averaging 100 posts/day.

I am convinced he IS just another sock of Dutch.

Daylight 63 is anything but right wing. In fact he’s quite the leftist.

True. Isn't it hilarious that 'conservative' is being used as a general insult now?

 

[Into the Night]

You're free to fantasize that there is widespread scorn of me, rather than just the petty grievances of a handful of right-wing Trump Dick Suckers. I'm sure it makes you feel exhilarated to believe that.

If you don't want "anything" to do with me, how do many of my threads get such a high post count?

People calling you out for your bullshitting, and you posting for the sake of posting to try to inflate your ego.

 

[Into the Night]

That's not the question that interested me though.

This is the philosophical question I teased out of the article:

In electromagnetism and most other fields of physics, imaginary numbers are merely a mathematical convenience. All the relevant phenomena can still be described using nothing but real numbers. Quantum mechanics is an exception: The observable quantities and probabilities are by necessity all real, but the underlying quantum states and governing equations involve imaginary numbers, and there’s no simple way to remove them.

In new theoretical work they find that....no real-valued version of quantum theory can duplicate all the predictions of the familiar complex-valued formulation.

Quantum physics does not use imaginary numbers.

 

[Into the Night]

The weird thing about you is that you are barely on my radar at all, and unless you're frantically composing replies to me, I barely notice you are here.

But my posts and threads are obviously very important to, and you are constantly clicking on my threads, reading my posts, bookmarking links about me, and spending the time to compose posts to me.

I can literally count on three fingers the number of dudes who were that interested in me since I registered here 20 years ago. lol

Go pop your ego balloon, Sybil.

 

[anonymoose]

I am convinced he IS just another sock of Dutch.

About how many do you reckon he has?

 

[Into the Night]

you always say this shit.

you're always wrong.

I have never used the buzzword 'acoustic impedance', NoName.

 

[Into the Night]

In mathematics, the complex plane is the plane formed by the complex numbers, with a Cartesian coordinate system such that the horizontal x-axis, called the real axis, is formed by the real numbers, and the vertical y-axis, called the imaginary axis, is formed by the imaginary numbers. - Wikipedia

Complex numbers are not a plane. Wikipedia is wrong, yet again.

 

[Into the Night]

About how many do you reckon he has?

It's hard to count accurately, since he uses some of them rarely, and others he uses more often; but I've noticed about 5 are generally active at one time. In a typical inversion fallacy, he tries to blame his problem on others.

When I run the Monthly Contest (currently in temporary hiatus), I count each one as a separate contestant. This DOES give Sybil an unfair advantage, and as a result, he has won ALL of the Monthly Contests I have run (typically as Dutch, but sometimes as one of his socks).

I have not gone through to determine what the original account is; but the Dutch sock is probably the most irritating rendition. He tends to use the Dutch sock to post perverted sexual fantasies or to post insults (why this is tolerated by Damo is beyond me).

Sybil does try to 'psychoanalyze' using most any of his socks, yet another inversion fallacy.

There is, unfortunately, no cure or effective treatment for his condition.


This is not, however, the War Zone. I will end my observations here.

 

[Into the Night]

Quantum Physics Falls Apart without Imaginary Numbers​

Imaginary numbers—the square roots of negative numbers—are an inescapable part of quantum theory, a study shows

Scientists had thought choosing to work with complex instead of real numbers didn't represent a physical stance, scientists thought it was just a matter of mathematical convenience.

Quantum Physics Falls Apart without Imaginary Numbers

Imaginary numbers—the square roots of negative numbers—are an inescapable part of quantum theory, a study shows

www.scientificamerican.com

Quantum physics does not use imaginary numbers.

 

[IBDaMann]

Quantum mechanics is an exception: The observable quantities and probabilities are by necessity all real, but the underlying quantum states and governing equations involve imaginary numbers, and there’s no simple way to remove them.

This is false. Quantum mechanics is math, not physics, and requires no explaning. The physics being explained requires only real numbers, ergo, the explanation, whether it is quantum mechanics or 5th-grade math, only requires real numbers. Hence the use of imaginary numbers is a convenience.

 

[IBDaMann]

No real number squared can equal negative 1.

Correct, but that is irrelevant to what I posted. It is not permissible to take the square root of a negative number.

The polynomial X^2+ 1 = 0 has no solution on the real number line.

Correct, but that is irrelevant to what I posted. It is not permissible to take the square root of a negative number.

It does have a solution on the complex number plane in the form of the imaginary number square root of negative 1.

Incorrect. This is math that we are discussing; it is not a matter of subjective opinion. I have no idea why you aren't simply submitting to my authority on this issue, especially considering that you have no understanding of the topic.

If you extend the real numbers to create complex numbers by adding the imaginary number i, all the rules of real numbers still apply.

Many polynomials only have solutions on the complex plane, not on the real number line.

Correct, but that is irrelevant to what I posted. It is not permissible to take the square root of a negative number.

 

[IBDaMann]

Though in electric and electromagnetic fields, we use j since I is used to represent current.

Yes, I get it, but the mathematician in me simply recognizes your use of j as being i. You are correct, and if you and I were to present writeups on the math of an electromagnetic field, it would be obvious which one was yours and which one was mine, i.e. I wouldn't use any of the correct engineering notation, and I would probably end with a

... or I would just co-author with you, i.e. work smarter, not harder.

 

[Bai Lan]

I have not gone through to determine what the original account is; but the Dutch sock is probably the most irritating rendition. He tends to use the Dutch sock to post perverted sexual fantasies or to post insults (why this is tolerated by Damo is beyond me).

why does damo allow quote box altering?

this fucks up lots of threads due to the stupidity of it.

 

[Cypress]

This is false. Quantum mechanics is math, not physics, and requires no explaning. The physics being explained requires only real numbers, ergo, the explanation, whether it is quantum mechanics or 5th-grade math, only requires real numbers. Hence the use of imaginary numbers is a convenience.

The researchers cited in the article claim that the underlying math for quantum systems requires imaginary numbers, and cannot be duplicated with real numbers.

That seems to imply that while imaginary numbers are a convenience in classical physics, they are an inherent part of the description of quantum reality.

I have no reason at this point to doubt what these researchers published.

 

[Cypress]

Quantum physics does not use imaginary numbers.

Complex numbers are not a plane. Wikipedia is wrong, yet again.

^^^ Incapable of learning.

You seem to believe you are omniscient, and there's nothing new for you to learn.

I actually avail myself of opportunities to learn on this forum. There are posters here who know a shit load more than me about medical science, the stock market, and macroeconomics, and I profit from reading their posts and keeping my mouth shut.

 

[IBDaMann]

The researchers cited in the article claim that the underlying math for quantum systems requires imaginary numbers, and cannot be duplicated with real numbers.

So explain why you don't call booooooolsch't. Obviously these buffoons know not of what they speak, yet you claim to have no reason to doubt them. You are simply a faithful member of the believing congregation. You are the same with regard to Global Warming.

I have no reason at this point to doubt what these researchers published.

.... just like you don't question any sermon based on physics violations.

 

[Cypress]

So explain why you don't call booooooolsch't. Obviously these buffoons know not of what they speak, yet you claim to have no reason to doubt them. You are simply a faithful member of the believing congregation. You are the same with regard to Global Warming.


.... just like you don't question any sermon based on physics violations.

The move you have to make is to open your mind to the possibility that the abstract idea of number includes more than just integers, rational numbers, and irrational numbers.

The idea of infinity, and the theorem proving that infinity comes in different sizes doesn't instantiate itself in any way in the real world. But what infinity and the complex plane of numbers shows is that there is an objectively real higher reality that does not instantiate itself in our physical reality.

The fact that our mind can't make the connection with things outside of our physical experience, or with things seem to defy common sense, is often a limitation of our minds, not of ultimate reality.