Proof that the squareroot of -i is 17. Watch

This discussion is closed.
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#81
Report 16 years ago
#81
(Original post by bono)
the square root of a negative number does not exist. i dont see how u can argue it.
But it does exist. We have made it so that it exists. Just like any other number. Since the square root of -1 has no real equivalent, mathematicians have had to create i. Centuries ago 0 didn't exist, but the Hindus 'discovered' it. The irrationals didn't exist but we made them so.
0
username9816
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#82
Report 16 years ago
#82
anyway, gotta go. nice chatting.

goodnight everyone.

PS: Good luck to those doing P2 exams tomorrow.
0
username9816
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#83
Report 16 years ago
#83
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
But it does exist. We have made it so that it exists. Just like any other number. Since the square root of -1 has no real equivalent, mathematicians have had to create i. Centuries ago 0 didn't exist, but the Hindus 'discovered' it. The irrationals didn't exist but we made them so.
right, so all my teachers and maths textbooks r wrong now.
0
Rich
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#84
Report 16 years ago
#84
(Original post by bono)
but the law says that the square root of a negative number does not exist.

i dont then understand how u can then say it does exist for special cases.
Which law is this? I've never heard of such a law. Something exists as long as it has a definition, which the square root of a negative number clearly does. It is the same definition as the square root of a positive number. It is the number such that when multiplied by itself, it yields the negative number in question. Whether or not you use the imaginary (i) notation to deal with square roots of negative numbers is irrelevant, the fact is that the concept exists, so they 'exist'.
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#85
Report 16 years ago
#85
(Original post by bono)
right, so all my teachers and maths textbooks r wrong now.
No I never even implied that.

Your primary school teachers never taught you to integrate, so which is wrong, integration or your primary school teachers?
0
fishpaste
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#86
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#86
Indeed, what's the squareroot of 2? 1.41...? No, well, that's an approximation. The squareroot of 2 is the number which when multiplied by itself equals 2.
0
Bhaal85
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#87
Report 16 years ago
#87
(Original post by fishpaste)
Indeed, what's the squareroot of 2? 1.41...? No, well, that's an approximation. The squareroot of 2 is the number which when multiplied by itself equals 2.
Hence surds.
0
Bhaal85
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#88
Report 16 years ago
#88
(Original post by rahaydenuk)
Which law is this? I've never heard of such a law. Something exists as long as it has a definition, which the square root of a negative number clearly does. It is the same definition as the square root of a positive number. It is the number such that when multiplied by itself, it yields the negative number in question. Whether or not you use the imaginary (i) notation to deal with square roots of negative numbers is irrelevant, the fact is that the concept exists, so they 'exist'.
I think he has been reading too many Judge Dredd comic books.
0
phreek
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#89
Report 16 years ago
#89
(Original post by fishpaste)
Indeed, what's the squareroot of 2? 1.41...? No, well, that's an approximation. The squareroot of 2 is the number which when multiplied by itself equals 2.
Yes just like theres no way to right out root2 in digits, you cant write out root -1, it is depicted as i.
0
Alaric
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#90
Report 16 years ago
#90
(Original post by rahaydenuk)
Which law is this? I've never heard of such a law. Something exists as long as it has a definition, which the square root of a negative number clearly does. It is the same definition as the square root of a positive number. It is the number such that when multiplied by itself, it yields the negative number in question. Whether or not you use the imaginary (i) notation to deal with square roots of negative numbers is irrelevant, the fact is that the concept exists, so they 'exist'.
Exactly.
It seems that bono is rather obsessed by continuing to believe the rather small simplified portion of plato's world that he's been exposed to.

Don't even bother trying to tell him there's an inherent inaccuracy in his calculator either!

Alaric.
0
hitchhiker_13
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#91
Report 16 years ago
#91
(Original post by bono)
the square root of a negative number does not exist. i dont see how u can argue it.

Don't you want to be a physicist? Better get your head stuck into some maths books!
0
Alaric
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#92
Report 16 years ago
#92
(Original post by hitchhiker_13)
Don't you want to be a physicist? Better get your head stuck into some maths books!
Well quite, how he could grasp quantum mechanical tunnelling without complex numbers is beyond me!

Alaric.
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#93
Report 16 years ago
#93
to the ancient ancient greeks (before their mathematical revolution), noninteger cvalues did not exist. they couldn't get their head around concepts like half or quater of something. to them numbers were just a way of counting things, like sheep in their field, so they didn't have a concept of half a sheep. they also didn't have a concept of 0 or negative integers..... if someone had come along demonstrating fractions, they would have said he was having a laugh and such "imaginary" numbers did not exist

to the 17th century mathematicians, they didn't have a concept of imaginary numbers, to them the squareroot of a negative number did not have a root. such a number was "imaginary" like fractions were to the ancient ancient greeks. unfortunately the term "imaginary" has stuck, an that is probably the drawback to helping people understand that theyu are no less real than "real" numbers.
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#94
Report 16 years ago
#94
seeing as we're all slowly returning back to normal, i thought i would just *bump* this thread up a little.
0
caz
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#95
Report 16 years ago
#95
http://www.uk-learning.net/t22860.html

proof that people do waste their lives
0
fishpaste
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#96
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#96
(Original post by caz)
http://www.uk-learning.net/t22860.html

proof that people do waste their lives
Yet you're the one posting. Grow up
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#97
Report 16 years ago
#97
(Original post by caz)
http://www.uk-learning.net/t22860.html

proof that people do waste their lives
Without the link it was proof enough
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (543)
66.54%
No (273)
33.46%

Watched Threads

View All