
Nylith Empyreal
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
86
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
Alright, I have one, though I suspect this to be more of a mathematics thing. But hopefully you can answer or perhaps someone else.. Why is the imaginary number system in relation to i = square root of -1 versus i = - , I've been trying to wrap my head around this, I understand the system as it is. But a philosophical and real life application seems to be out of my understanding. Isn't a negative number in itself imaginary, and simply a owe'd / wanted existing number of something. Like 5 - 8 doesn't work unless you add (-) to the equation which we can simply say is multiplied by a -1, meaning the answer -3 is actually (-1)(3) as it gives an ethereal answer to something that simply doesn't exist.
To delve further the negative sign itself is a symbol of imagination as there isn't -6 cars irl, it's simply a lack of or a want of 6 cars. To go further. To solve say square root -25 we change it to square root 25 x (-1) and get to 5 x square root -1 which we define as 5i, but couldn't it be that square root -1 is the same as square root 1 x -1 and continue on perpetually? To which case the only thing that makes it true is a single -1 or perhaps an opposite 1 x -1, as 1 x 1 = 1, -1 x -1 = 1, and 1 x -1 = -1, why isn't there say 1 x -1 = 1? or like x^2 = -25 (5^2i) it would be such that it's simply the same as -(5^2) thus the i is unneeded as the negative itself is imaginary?
I guess I'm trying to figure out the fault in my logic and would like a better explanation of this system as it as itself seems to be a different take of an already existing system in which it's purpose has no real application versus a negative as a representation of an imaginary number? Sorry if this is completely on a different title
But in regards to something like divide by 0, which isn't it simply the interaction of a (I forget the term) whole(?) number with 'nothing'? if you add nothing all you have is the same thing that you started with or minus nothing same thing. However when we multiply by nothing the whole number no longer exists, why? and why is it out of bounds to say division by nothing is nothing, generally multiplication and division are inverse to one another correct? If multiplication is # by sets of this # and division is # into segments of this #. What is the true need and limitation of dividing by 0
I hope this doesn't sound too confusing, I'm trying to wrap my head of the purpose of these two systems, as I'm going to call it , as zero interacts with numbers in a rather bizzare fashion that seems completely made up in a way the negatives / imaginary numbers work? If it is, I would try to best reformat as i can, but truly I'm failing to see their functions or motions to be complicated or merit of existence.
-á |