Why do they call it "real analysis"?
Is there a "fake analysis"?
Why is a [math]\mathbb{R}P^2[/math] a real projective space if we can't embed it in [math]R^3[/math]? I'd call it fake instead.
Ps. nice duck.
>>8462532
It's analysis of the real numbers. Yes, there is also an "imaginary analysis". No fake one afaik, tho.
>>8462544
>fake
that's nonstandard
>>8462532
no, but there's "complex analysis"
>>8462532
"""""""""""""'Real""""""""""""""" analysis actually doesn't exist since the reals don't exist.
>>8462532
>Is there a "fake analysis"?
its called calculus
>>8462563
>complex analysis
Wow, what a pretentious name for a field of mathematics. Do mathematicians really feel the need to prove how smart they are so much that they name their field "complex"?
>>8463224
Mathematicians aren't all pretentious. you're a fucking idiot if you're serious. Complex analysis is the analysis of the complex field and is centre around i^2 = -1. you should graduate first before calling people pretentious. Fuckhead this is the Maths board
>>8462862
underrated
>>8463229
>is centre around i^2 = -1
What the fuck lol, I remember that bullshit from when I was in high school. What a load of bullshit. Like how can a number be the square root of a negative number? Lol like what the fuck? Can't believe mathematicians are wasting their time studying numbers that don't even exist.
>>8463237
You were probably told you can't "square root a negative number" when you were a little kid. We can if we define another field of mathematics. it's not bullshit, idiot.
>>8463229
>>8463244
Being baited that hard
>>8462532
Why do they call it "Lie theory"?
Is there a "Truth theory"?
>>8463263
There is a truth theory.
It is called rational trigonometry
>>8462563
Is there simple analysis?
>>8463285
I have a book called "Basic Complex Analysis"
>>8463263
Why do they call it game theory if we dont learn how to make an rpg?
>>8464011
Why do they call it game theory if we don't learn how to hunt deer?
>>8464078
Why do they call it measure theory if youre not even using a ruler?
>>8463237
Okay then, what's the solution to [math]x^2+1=0[/math]?
And why does it always pop up in physics?
>>8464123
It doesn't have a solution because you can't have a square root of a negative number, dumbass.
>>8463229
>Mathematicians aren't all pretentious.
Correct. They're all insufferable autists
>>8462532
Yes, it's called, "Engineering."
>>8463285
Calculus
>>8464848
Why not?
>>8464921
Please give me the numerical value of the square root of a negative number.
Pro tip: you can't.
>>8462862
Topkek
>>8463229
I... I can't tell if you're the one who's been baited hard, or if you're intentionally acting retarded as bait.
Enough internet for today
>>8464945
I don't believe in complex numbers. I just believe in pairs of numbers from the reals with nifty $ and @ operations defined as
(a,b) $ (c, d) = (a+b, c+d)
(a,b) @ (c, d) = (ac-bd, ad+bc)
Messing around with pairs of numbers like this is super useful and interesting! You should try it! Fuck those stupid imaginary numbers though.
>>8464957
*(a, b) $ (c, d) =(a+c, b+d)
I am retarded and will commit sudoku immediately
>>8464957
An algebraist ! GET HIM !
>>8463229
>>8463244
falling for trash-tier turbobait