# Talk:899: Number Line

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)

In fact, complex numbers are nearly more real than real ones! Complex analysis really opened my eyes to how much "stepping out" can help in solving problems. The complex notion of analyticity yields fruit in real analysis. Extensions to hypercomplex numbers are weirder, however. --Quicksilver (talk) 20:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Analyticity must be an imaginary word, and therefore would be found one unit directly above any dictionary. 50.203.89.169 14:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

- Oh my god, I can't believe how hard I laughed at that. Would an imaginary friend actually be above you then? I'm going to use that sometime. 108.162.219.61 21:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Is unexplored a map reference? Halfhat (talk) 17:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Note that the digits 5 and 6 do not show up on any of the numbers in the comic, reinforcing the fact that the integers 5 and 6 are unexplored. Blitzer (talk) 02:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

- So the 5th digit of pi can not be known either? Tharkon (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
- The
*wha*th digit of pi? 108.162.215.119 01:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

- The

Thank God (or someone else, I'm not choosy) that the SCP link here still works. The rest of the site's gone private. 108.162.250.223 (talk) *(please sign your comments with ~~~~)*

It appears that Wikipedia had noticed the implications of the title text here. The message now says that it might never be complete, but can be expanded with reliably sourced articles. I'm not 100% sure it's due to Randall's involvement, but I like to think so. --141.101.104.17 22:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)