Just to spoil everyone’s day, Captain Canuck is wrong. The complex numbers do no have a natural ordering, and hence inequalities are meaningless. For example, 1 is a complex number. So is 1 > i or is i > 1? The only way to “force” an inequality on the complex numbers is to define a metric on the space. This was not indicated, however.
… you definitely need more than just a metric (there is a natural metric on C, that induced by the magnitude). You need to define partial order… which would be precisely an inequality.
Just to spoil everyone’s day, Captain Canuck is wrong. The complex numbers do no have a natural ordering, and hence inequalities are meaningless. For example, 1 is a complex number. So is 1 > i or is i > 1? The only way to “force” an inequality on the complex numbers is to define a metric on the space. This was not indicated, however.
… you definitely need more than just a metric (there is a natural metric on C, that induced by the magnitude). You need to define partial order… which would be precisely an inequality.
neither of you are ever getting laid
F*ck, I can’t get the window closed!
2(LOL) + i <3 !
“The force is strong with this one”
that’s math all over your face yo!
[...] source [...]
[...] geeks and love : http://www.lukesurl.com/archives/916 [...]
Holy crap! 51 (now 52) comments! Is this a record, Luke?
I think so. http://www.lukesurl.com/archives/198 has 43 at the mo’ and I think that was the previous title-holder.
[...] An unequal relationship http://www.lukesurl.com/archives/916 [...]
hi digg
[...] Luke Surl] Categories: Sarasa Tags: Comentarios (0) Referencias (0) Dejar un comentario [...]
[...] a silly notion. [...]
Not sure which came first, but this is on qdb: http://qdb.us/299631
When i first glanced at this I was really confused b/c my usual username is emilycat27….
but lol.