Path: ...!news.nobody.at!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.nntp4.net!pi2.pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <wfgk6htA7yJgc9ai3px-3f3FKII@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: New way of dealing with complex numbers
References: <kRgli3QEdimCvJ9569p9c9pq7Kc@jntp> <vqemhv$2gck$1@news.muc.de> <h8RR2Nzw97n_q0rv1uxcQeGImmk@jntp>
 <UUHFRwScFhtLox9AxAbFSKNqS5s@jntp> <sV_3zvUKDE_Hgw9KIPPia-_AMkM@jntp>
Newsgroups: sci.math
JNTP-HashClient: K_V0YP_yK1sM3-r9MRN7XR_E_RE
JNTP-ThreadID: c6gHfjF1zb3jexYtsO4J-uwTdUA
JNTP-ReferenceUserID: 4@nemoweb.net
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=wfgk6htA7yJgc9ai3px-3f3FKII@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 25 12:20:17 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="073785b44c2f50fc0336698b4f123e3e9b227084"; logging-data="2025-03-08T12:20:17Z/9234488"; 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: 2619
Lines: 33

Le 07/03/2025 à 19:00, Richard Hachel a écrit :
> Le 07/03/2025 à 13:12, Python a écrit :
>> Le 07/03/2025 à 13:04, Richard Hachel a écrit :
>> ...
>>> Nothing prevents mathematicians from proposing their ideas, nothing prevents me 
>>> from proposing mine (validated in logic by AI).
>> 
>> AI "validates" also that cows lay eggs.
>> 
>>> Mathematicians pose i²=-1 and sqrt(i)=-1.
>> 
>> They don't "pose" i^2 = -1 they *define* C and i in such a way that i^2 = -1.
>> 
>> They certainly don't pretend that sqrt(i) = -1 ! Where did you get this from ?
>> 
>> sqrt(i) is (1 + i)/sqrt(2) (for the principal value of sqrt).
> 
> I obviously understand what you're saying.
> 
> What I blame you for is unconditionally following what you've learned (I'm not 
> saying everything is wrong, I'm not a conspiracy theorist), and never questioning 
> a system of thought that may have flaws.
> 
> For traditional mathematicians, it's true.
> 
> For me, it's false.

What you claimed above is "Mathematicians pose i²=-1 and sqrt(i)=-1." was 
not about your "system" (which does not even exists as it is 
inconsistant), you wrote that some "mathematicians" would have "posed" 
that sqrt(i) = -1. This is factually WRONG.