Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <CBu8wFqdO3Grfl9vm8TrVYMDlas@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Equation complexe
References: <oAvE_mEWK82aUJOdwpGna1Rzs1U@jntp> <cd899a53-0106-466f-8e13-a2e8e57ca2ba@att.net> <YEkr142e3Iw10sNTl94yHf-u1kY@jntp>
Newsgroups: sci.math
JNTP-HashClient: zKASFOcchvfmuFJ0USKnhy5ZT0M
JNTP-ThreadID: O5CXkAcAe1D7_dx2s1eq7KbScfI
JNTP-ReferenceUserID: 4@nemoweb.net
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=CBu8wFqdO3Grfl9vm8TrVYMDlas@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 25 20:38:27 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="fd2131a9fa825445f413d5a0e5d54e5cdfeaa501"; logging-data="2025-02-25T20:38:27Z/9221963"; posting-account="190@nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="julien.arlandis@gmail.com"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: Python <jp@python.invalid>
Bytes: 2736
Lines: 41

Le 25/02/2025 à 21:07, Richard Hachel a écrit :
> Le 25/02/2025 à 18:21, Jim Burns a écrit :
>> On 2/25/2025 9:23 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> 
>>> x^4=-81
>>>
>>> What is x?
>> 
>> x ∈ {(+1+𝑖)⋅3/√2, (+1-𝑖)⋅3/√2, (-1+𝑖)⋅3/√2, 
>> (-1-𝑖)⋅3/√2}
> 
>  Oui, c'est ce que dis aussi l'Intelligence artificielle, mais sans trop 
> expliquer pourquoi. 
> 
>  Personally, I propose only one root, but it is not in conformity with what is 
> said about "complex numbers".

So it is not about complex as it is not only said but proven from the 
definition of complex numbers.

> I remind you that I do not admit the definition i²=-1, 

It is not the definition, it is a consequence of a definition that I've 
shown you numerous times. You are a liar.


> which, in itself, is not false, but so narrow that I do not understand its 
> semantic interest
> For me, the definition must be extended to all powers of x such that i^x=-1.

Which leads to immediate inconsistencies. This property is contradictory.

> In short, it is necessary to go through a constancy of i^x=-1, like 1^x=1.
> This defined, we easily have x^4=-81 if x=3i.
> The other four roots being incorrect (in the proposed system).

This is utter bullshit. As are all your your fantasies. Build on top of 
your ignorance, hypocrisies, stupidity and arrogance.