>use real numbers
>cant solve certain poblems without taking square root of negative number
> muh uh
> lets just pretent that we can take square roots of negative numbers
> also 1+2+3..=-1/12
Why anyone takes these clowns seriously?
>>8907846
You can solve any problem which models the observable world with only real numbers. Real numbers should be renamed to observable numbers or something like that, ever since we have gotten into meme science and quantum mechanics.
Perhaps all numbers should be real numbers. Instead of being a real number line, it should be a real number plane.
I don't think we can use imaginary numbers if they aren't real
>>8907860
"Real number" concept is also questionable, if you look at axioms they use to define reals, some of the axioms are just made up to make it work as they wanted.
Why does every engineering fag deny the absolute BEAUTY and POWER of the complex numbers?
They are the most beautiful things in the universe Euler's Identity is literally proof of God
>>8907851
Oh sorry forgot you as well.
>>8907877
> muh everyone is retard
> we will just make up another meaningless concept when something in our theory doesnt work as we want
>>8907881
yes, yes of course! yes... hupta gumma moo moo shoe
>>8907860
>I don't think we can use imaginary numbers if they aren't real
>not knowing what the definition of imaginary numbers is
>getting hung up on the word imaginary
>thinks science is religion
>feels smart enough to bring this shit to a board with people who will know he is retarded
>>8907877
>>8907878
>when the leader of the retard club calls you retarded
>>8907887
> definition
> god by definition is a creator of the universe and bible by definition is a word of god
> oh, you dont believe in god? LOOK UP THE DEFINITION OF GOD, RETARD