Thread 723511519

What are some complex games?

Algebra tells me that the equation is solved as it is in its simplest form and the variable is still unknown

>>723511656
There is no variable retard

It feels like this exists purely for the sake of alternating current.

>>723511519 (OP)
>picrel
4d golf if you like imaginary planes

>>723512153
Didn't know it. thanks

The imaginary part is 4, not 4i.

>>723511519 (OP)
5D chess with multiverse time travel

Any game engines that use dual quaternions' automatic differentiation for efficiently orienting objects in the direction of travel along paths?

>>723512321
Wrong

>>720512841
>>720508982
>>720507635

>imaginary numbers are real goy there actually is a square root of negative one
See the problem with the entire premise is obviously that how we are thinking about this type of mathematics and our syntax is just incomplete. If "imaginary numbers" actually DO exist and DO have real life consequences, then it cant possibly be the case that the way we think about the square root of negative one is complete.

7 or -7?

High school was 20 years ago...

>some bullshit sounding math
>it's actually really useful for radio
>radio is all voodoo bullshit
Yeah, that tracks.

>>723513642
No math is real, it is a useful fuction that we use to describe reality.

>>723511519 (OP)
>imaginary part
Yeah nah, I'm not participating in that nonsense.

I swear none of you have finished highschool.

>>723511519 (OP)
>real numbers and quantum numbers
>quantum numbers are always entangled with their real counterparts, but never truly present
fascinating

>>723514025
Someone taking 2 apples away from a group of 4 apples and only having 2 apples left is a real thing that happens anon. Math IS real. Our notation and syntax is arbitrary sure, but the actual functions are real and they describe reality.

>>723513683
You can solve this any further, it's just 3+4i.
If it was 3+(-4i) then it could become 7.

>>723514648
>they describe reality
Is that not exactly what I said?
I would argue functions are again, not real, but model what we observe of the cause and effect of reality and are useful in predicting them. Perhaps me making this distinction is autistic, but whatever.

>>723514974
>can
*can't
>3+(-4i)
*3+(-4i^2)

>>723514648
>a group of 4 apples and only having 2 apples left
But what is an apple?

Do imaginary numbers have applications in gamedevving?

>>723515689
>img
heh.

>>723515774
2d rotations are often based on imaginary numbers

>>723515774
Yeah, quaternions.
You get gimbal lock and other nasty inaccuracies without them.

>>723515774
Quaternions are neat
https://youtu.be/Ri2xIhcii8I

>>723514648
Yeah and there's a bunch of stuff that I can't remember right now that's calculated using complex numbers

>>723516856
Goddamnit I'm gonna have to learn this shit

The so called "imaginary numbers" are neither imaginary, nor numbers. The variable "i" just describes rotation on the third axis of a 2 axis plane.

>>723518781
That's why they should have been called Direct and Lateral numbers originally proposed by some old math cunt (Newton maybe? idk). But "real" and "imaginary" caught on due to Descartes.

>>723511656
There is no equation and variable you fucking retard.
American education

>>723511519 (OP)
I wanna Lockpick

9

>>723513642
>>723514025
>>723514648
This is acknowledged by the system complex numbers exist under. Why do you think they're called Natural numbers?

>>723515774
Yes. If you're making a 3D game of any sort you're probably using them because all readily available engines use them when you're doing something as simple as rotating a 3D object.

>>723522252
Natural numbers are the ones made by god

>using i instead of j for imaginary numbers
lmao

>>723523059
>not using both
fucking pleb

>>723523256
>>723523059
(i)maginary
(j)igaboo-repellent?

>>723511519 (OP)
> i = sqrt(-1)
FUCK, it's i^2 := -1, why does everyone get this wrong?

>>723522885
Now I know you're trolling

>>723523059
>j
>"we don't want to use i because that stands for current!" -small penis ees
>meanwhile "why yes, J stands for spatial current density, we use i for the imaginary unit" -big penis physics chads
the j convention usually implies negative temporal phase / positive spatial phase convention, which makes no fucking sense to a sane person build their theory up from scratch

>>723524002
using natural numbers, you can define integers
using integers, you can define rational numbers
(using rational numbers, you can define irrational numbers)
using cauchy sequences of rational numbers, you can define real numbers
studying the properties of roots of polynomials, you can discover complex numbers
all flows from the natural numbers

>>723524493
Yes but that's not why they were brought up
>N: I have 2 apples (yes you do)
>Z: I lost 2 apples (technically still N but sure)
>R: I have 2.5 apples (could be 2 apples and 1 half-apple but sure)
>Q: I have sqrt(5) apples (???)
>R: I have e apples (?????)
>C: I have i apples (no you don't)
You could take the magnitude of i but that's still R>0. Z>0 is the most "natural" number system.
When someone tries to pull the "math isn't real" card, what they're actually trying to say is fully acknowledged by the system they're failing to criticise. Don't get me started on {0, 1} if they try that shit you knock their teeth in

>>723525304
go to college

>>723524493
>using rational numbers, you can define irrational numbers
How, exactly? A bijection or even an injection from real to rational doesn't exist.

Noita

>>723511519 (OP)
Imaginary and complex numbers don't exist. You can't convince me they do. The number line is a 1 dimensional string, not a 2d array.

>>723529326
The usual method for constructing the reals from the rationals is using equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences (i.e. metric space completion) or using Dedekind cuts. If you want specifically the irrationals I guess you just take a set difference.

>>723529790
>Dedekind cuts
Oh yeah, I studied these once in my life. Completely forgot about them. Thanks anon!

>>723513642
Imaginary Numbers aren't a physical thing, they just describe a path through space. In Math, you can describe the movement of something with 3 axis for translation, 3 imaginary ones for rotation around a pivot point, and another for time.

Can someone explain real quick how mathematicians can calculate things that can take an infinite number of steps to calculate? Like e or integrals

>>723530042
They don't calculate infinitely. They just look what doesn't change after enough steps.

>>723530001
We already have a system for that, it's called cartesian coordinates. No imaginary numbers necessary

>>723530131
Oh that actually makes sense. Thanks.

>>723530158
Ok, and try to describe rotation without spending an hour on matrix multiplication.

>>723515689
>>723515896
>ringo
more like gringo

>>723523995
that's the same thing you mega faggot retard

>>723530042
Let's say you embedded a gem in the trunk of a tree thirty years ago and now you want it back. Do you try to mathematically locate the gem without harming the tree, or do you cut it down and burn away the wood? In this example, the gem is the integral and the tree is all the bullshit numbers that cannot be the integral.
t. doesn't know jack shit about math

>>723530575
Isn't that what polar coordinates are for?

oh sick i killed another bot thread
fuck ai

>>723511519 (OP)
Bioshock infinite was really complex. The first puzzle is basically unsolvable without a guide.

>>723513642
>real numbers are real goy there actually is a limit to the the sequence 3, 3.1, 3.14, 3.141...

>>723531471
I'm sure 4th dimensional being know the exact value of pie

>>723511519 (OP)
The answer is 3.
Algebra is the tranny of math. More like AGPra.
>THE NUMBER IS IMAGINARY
Just like Ellen Paige's Y chromosome.

Get the fuck outta here.

>>723530917
no it ain't.
i^2 := -1 uniquely identifies the complex unit
i := sqrt(-1) does not uniquely identify a number, as both +/-i squared equal -1

>>723511656
Man you will be in real shock when you start doing calculus and every integration solution has C in it.

>>723531567
We are 4D beings. We're not good at it but we can fake it on paper, well enough that we would know if pi was finite on the time axe. Either we're doing it completely wrong or we need to go 5D or higher.

holy shit did anyone here even finish high school?

If it is impossible to square root a negative then why bother with imaginary numbers? Why not just make it a rule to not fucking do the thing that is impossible to do instead of humoring a retard's delusion and granting them the IMAGINARY sequence thus ruining math forever?

>>723532058
That image is out of date. Willing to bet it's 5-10 points lower for most boards by now.

>>723532058
>/sci/
>141
if that shit hole has anything higher than "severe mental retardation" than the entire scale is fucked

>>723532058
there's no fucking way /lit/ is top of the heap
if bookfags are so smart why are they still reading books

>>723531749
retard there is an R-automorphism of C sending i to -i, it is impossible to define the complex "unit" uniquely
>as both +/-i squared equal -1
so both satisfy x^2 = -1 and it's impossible to tell them apart

>>723513642
It's literally just the y axis on a number line.

>>723532474
nigger, there is exactly 1 number whose square is -1
there are 2 numbers whose square root is -1

>>723532058
>highest iq board is also the most leftist board
How will rightoids cope lmao

>>723532158
That chart is at least 10 years old.
Back then /sci/ wasn't as bad as it is today.

>>723532080
because as it turns out its really useful at describing real world phenomena for a lot of applied mathematics

>>723521982
I wanna get the Math PhD

>>723532746
my bad youre even dumber than i thought
>there is exactly 1 number whose square is -1
i^2 = -1
(-i)^2=(-1)^2i^2 = -1

>there are 2 numbers whose square root is -1
>sqrt(x) = -1
that's not i retardbro

>>723533171
please follow the advice in the top right corner

Are the imaginary numbers in the room with us?

Quantum mechanics describes everything with complex numbers. They are fundamental to the theory. Everything is a complex wave function.

>>723533570
Yes. Real numbers are a subset of imaginary numbers.

>>723511519 (OP)
i only like them because they give us fractals