>imaginary numbers
>not part of the "real number set"
>they actually exist in nature in real life

>>16696520 (OP)
It’s just a quotient ring of the univariate polynomial ring of the reals. Specifically C = R[x]/(x^2+1).

>>16696534
>that many words to say "it's an alternate encoding of pi"
Really?

>>16696534
>muh rangs
sure

>>16696520 (OP)
>they actually exist in nature in real life
Where?

>>16696744
in our hearts

>>16696871
Well my dad had open heart surgery and they didn't find any imaginary numbers in there

>>16696520 (OP)
I is a formulaic compression of 1^2(-1)

>>16696890
I meant to say (sqrt(1))(-1)

>>16696744
The same place you see any other number in reality

>>16696871
Feel free to show me a picture of i hearts or even just i people if you don't want to go ripping out i hearts just for a picture.

>>16696520 (OP)
Some people call them tangential numbers.

>>16696520 (OP)
when someone says "imaginary numbres" I know for a fact the most dumbest retarded shit will come next form his mouth

>>16696744
>>16696871
>>16697392
>>16697763
Prove 1 exists in real life. Not a singular quality of something, literally the number 1. Show it to me.

Observational evidence would seem to support the existence of 1.

>>16697788
Those are ascii characters, not 1.

>>16696520 (OP)
>NOOOOO THE LBEL MUST BE PERFECT OR I CAN’T DO IT NOOO NONO NO NOOOO

>>16697788
1 is the only number

>>16697811
How is 1 a number without 2 being a number? What does it mean then?

>>16697814
just another midwit who learned about successor construction on wikipedia

>>16697814
>>16697815
Invoking any other number is a shorthand. A multitude of things are not one in the same, we have to eliminate the seemings of retards who think their counting years are legitimate just because they were taught when they were young, weak, and pathetic.

>>16697815
What? Lol retard
>>16697817
What does counting have to do with anything? What makes 1 a number?

>>16697820
1 is the only number by definition.

>>16697825
Okay, what's the definition?

>>16697828
A quantity.

>>16697833
You're using that as a synonym for number, not a definition for 1. Try again. What's the definition of 1.

>>16697838
1 is the only number, by definition.

>>16697839
By what definition?

>>16697841
A quantity.

>>16697842
You're using that as a synonym for number, not a definition for 1. Try again. What's the definition of 1.

>>16697843
1 is the only number, by definition.

>>16697845
By what definition?

>>16697846
The definition of number.

Imaginary numbers are an extra number to account for phase. Take Eulers equation e^ix = cos x + i sin x, the real part is the actual amplitude of the wave you measure, the sine part tells you the 'momentum' of the wave, if its increasing or decreasing.

The wave equation x'' = -x states that the wave accelerates inversely to its position, but you need to account for its velocity too.

You need both position and velocity to represent a state in that system.

>>16697898
>I can't into 4 dimensional waves
yeah, well, sucks to be you buddy

>>16697949
Good thing we live in three dimensional space then.

>>16697777
In your post. Twice, even.