Re: About Hachel's alternate "complex" numbers

Le 03/03/2025 à 18:53, Richard Hachel a écrit :

Le 03/03/2025 à 18:31, guido wugi a écrit :

Op 1/03/2025 om 15:15 schreef Python:

 

I think he has problems with Lorentz features as well :)

  Absolutely not.
 

A bit of a compensation for his absurd i-rules?

 I have no problem with Mr. Poincaré's transformations given for the first time in their positive form well before Mr. Einstein's plagiarism.

There is no plagiarism. Both Einstein and Poincaré would kick your ass together if they could encounter you.
The irony is that your first ideas, when it comes to "complex" numbers (aa'+bb', ab'+a'b), is... the mathematical structure of Minkowki space-time. That you despise for some reason without any understanding of what it is (same with Einstein and Poincaré, btw, you don't understand a single line of their work).

My ideas on the nature of the imaginary i are to be classified in the clarity and beauty of mathematics. What do mathematicians say? That i²=-1? What a great deal! They do not define i, but its square.

Same lie again and again Richard? Mathematicians define C first, then define i as a specific member of this set and *then* they demonstrate that i^2 = -1.
I, and others, have shown you what these definitions are. You are a damn hypocrite.