Difference between revisions of "Talk:899: Number Line"
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:It goes up (literally above 0). A number line can be extended to a complex plane with sqrt(-1) as the unit of measurement in the vertical direction. Or at least, that's where it actually goes. I don't know where Randall would put it. [[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 01:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | :It goes up (literally above 0). A number line can be extended to a complex plane with sqrt(-1) as the unit of measurement in the vertical direction. Or at least, that's where it actually goes. I don't know where Randall would put it. [[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 01:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| − | I'm sorry...are you indicating the ACTUAL location for an IMAGINARY number? | + | I'm sorry...are you indicating the ACTUAL location for an IMAGINARY number? {{unsigned|74.213.186.41}} |
| + | |||
| + | Yes, that's exactly where it is (up to switching clockwise for counterclockwise). There is nothing strange about providing a location for imaginary or complex numbers, the location described is logical, and the adjective 'imaginary' is an artifact of nomenclature and nothing more.[[Special:Contributions/173.48.140.216|173.48.140.216]] 20:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:40, 30 March 2013
Where does sqrt(-1) go? 67.78.183.206 19:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
- It goes up (literally above 0). A number line can be extended to a complex plane with sqrt(-1) as the unit of measurement in the vertical direction. Or at least, that's where it actually goes. I don't know where Randall would put it. 75.69.96.225 01:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry...are you indicating the ACTUAL location for an IMAGINARY number? -- 74.213.186.41 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
Yes, that's exactly where it is (up to switching clockwise for counterclockwise). There is nothing strange about providing a location for imaginary or complex numbers, the location described is logical, and the adjective 'imaginary' is an artifact of nomenclature and nothing more.173.48.140.216 20:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
