Thread: .999~ = 1
View Single Post
  #67   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-04-2004, 22:36
Grommit Grommit is offline
Registered User
#0115 (Monta Vista Robotics)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Cupertino
Posts: 47
Grommit will become famous soon enoughGrommit will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to Grommit
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by dk5sm5luigi
This is exactly why the proof that I posted with e^(i*pi) doesn't work.
No. This is quite different. Quaternions are an extension of the real numbers and you don't need to even mention them to talk about e^(i*pi). With quaternions, ab != ba in some circumstances. There are even octonions with a(bc) != (ab)c.

The reason why your e^(i*pi) thing doesn't work is that you are taking the log of a negative/complex value incorrectly. Why does log(exp(3pi*i) = i*pi? Because exp(3pi*i) = exp(pi*i) = -1 and in the natural extension of the log to the complex plane log(-1) = i*pi. So one must be very careful when using natural logs on complex arguments. There are several good books on the subject, in fact MIT has a complex analysis class available entirely free. This is necessary before one "proves" anything involving complex arguments using functions defined on the reals.
__________________
Shrenik Shah
Engineering Director
Team 115: Monta Vista Robotics

Congratulations to Mr. Shinta for winning Woodie Flowers at Silicon Valley!
Reply With Quote