/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10847575
It's imaginary

>>10847575
sides are lengths which cannot be imaginary, i is for other maths, physics not geometry.

>>10847575
It's a meme.

>>10847575
It's complex

>>10847585
>sides are lengths which cannot be imaginary
Why?

So that "triangle" has an area of [math]1.5i[/math] if you use the half base times height formula and that's what you get if you plug the side lengths into heron's formula too.

Memes aside, they follow the same rules as real triangles so you can treat them as triangles if you really want to. Finding an application where they are useful would help.

>>10847575
It depends on your evaluation of distance. Euclidean distance would have you multiply by their complex conjugates, and so the hypotenuse would be of length [math] sqrt{2} [/math]

>>10847634
whoops, code should be
[math] \sqrt{2} [/math]

we made it up

imaginary triangle is legit if you allow imaginary length

>>10847575
Complex numbers are not scalars, they are vectors. You are confusing concepts

>>10847575
>side of length i
Literally meaningless.

>>10847575
The sqrt3i hypotenuse should be sqrt5i op, shame on you to be that shit at complex arithmetic

>>10847729
how are you feeling these days?

>>10847575
i*sqrt(3) hypotenuse is inconsistent. it woukld have to take many different values

>>10847801
terrible
I'm surrounded by my enemies who steal from me to pay their attacks on my friends, and everyone else on earth, apparently, gives their silent consent, or not so silent when they heckle me

>>10847575

The consensus is that you should take the magnitude of the number | i |=1.

>>10847634
bingo

if z = a+ib
=> |z| = sqrt( a*a + b*b)

in the image
z = 1+ i
=> |z| = sqrt(1*1+1*1) = sqrt(2)

>>10847979
sorry to hear that, and I hope your situation improves

>>10847575

So this is a good example of why points in algebra are not lines in geometry.
In Euclidean space you can exchange them freely because they are invariant, but in complex space you can't.

Lots of spaces you can't. Geometry is defined by the relationship of the shape to itself. Algebra is defined by the relationship of the points to the space.

See projective geometry and affine space.

>>10848145
Please buy my book and tell other people how awesome it is.

>>10848151
confirmed troll

>>10847575
dude division by zero lmao

>>10848151
dear jon,
I've been reading the paperback and enjoy it so far. Just so you know.

>>10847575
>consensus
>meme
babby lern'd some new werds

>>10847597
Because metric by definition is a function with real values

>>10848753
And yet, going around the standard definition and using [math]i[/math] as length creates a consistent triangle

>>10847575
triangle drama update:
it's complex

Consensus is fucking irrelevant.

>>10848765
no it doesn't length is defined as a positive real number, now gtfo

>>10848765
>Consistent triangle with a zero side
You mean a consistent straight line? Sure

>>10849025
It's not a straight line though, it has angles. They just have an imaginary component.

>>10848781
>Consensus is fucking irrelevant.
truer words have not been spoken

>>10847575
I can't imagine.

So:

[math]\frac{1}{2} \times 3i \times 0 \times sin(A) = 1.5i[/math]

[math]0 \times sin(A) = 1.5i[/math]

[math]sin(A) = \frac{1.5i}{0}[/math]

Division by 0 must by possible if we say imaginary triangles are real or do we just say side length of 0 is not allowed because it results in dividing by 0 when working out angles?

>>10848151
>>10850302
I like your book, would it be possible to get my copy signed? I could mail it to you.

>>10848913
Then how come when a bar bends its determinant to be imaginary then it bends?

>>10850442
I would be happy to sign it for you. What was your favorite part? Tell me where to send it and I'll send you my address. (Make sure to include return shipping.)

>>10850251
>It's not a straight line though, it has angles. They just have an imaginary component.
lmao, what are the angles ?

>>10850477
what?

>>10850495
Nice! Send me an email: mochizukisupreme@gmail.com

>>10850377
>he can't divide by zero

>>10847575
Using any complex number to denote a length is shill. Things like length, area, and volume only make sense when they are assigned real values.

>>10850377

>imaginary triangles are real
>imaginary
>real

tell me how to divide by zero please I really need to know to prove someone wrong

>>10847575
but if you draw the complex plane, the imaginary axis must be perpendicular to the real axis. Here 1 and iroot3 are not perpendicular. So it's bullshit.

>>10850591
ok, sent

>>10847575
We use real numbers to measure lengths because the real line is an ordered metric field, you retard. The complex plane is a metric field, but it has no intrinsic order on it, hence why you end up with shit like that when the absolute value of both sides is one. If this were on the real line (and both numbers were positive since negative lengths are meaningless (vectors don't count. They have positive length, but a negative orientation/scalar multiplier)), you could say that the sum of two sides is greater than the length of the other side, which is a necessary requirement for being a triangle (HINT HINT). You can't here because you can't compare i+1 to 0 with "<" or ">", just that with "!=" and "=" (of which it's clearly the former),you're too autistic to realize how dumb this picture is and how a length of 0 just be a fucking point, not a line segment.

TL;DR: You are a fucking stupid autist for pushing this mathematically impossible "imaginary triangle" meme and you should kill yourself for it

>>10847575
The y-axis of the complex plane does not contain complex numbers. It contains the imaginary part of complex numbers, which is real (remember z = a +ib, b is real).

>>10847575
>not posting the proper meme triangle