Re: The splendor of true

Le 10/03/2025 à 15:24, Richard Hachel a écrit :

Le 10/03/2025 à 14:52, efji a écrit :

Le 10/03/2025 à 14:37, Richard Hachel a écrit :

Le 10/03/2025 à 09:33, efji a écrit :

Well...
In his disturbed mind, (a,b) = a-b on the x axis :)

 Yes.
 It's what i said.

 Then you get a 1d fractal...

  No.
  It is true that my method is much simpler and more elegant to find the complex roots of functions, and that it is much more detailed. I explain in concrete terms what we do as rotation and with what, and I explain what i is, and its universality.
Therefore, in the case of orthonormal Cartesian frames, there is no longer any need to try to place abstract roots in 3D that have nothing to do with the subject. A simple x'Ox axis is enough without even using the y'Oy dimension. It is enough to cross an inverse axis i'Oi (from right to left) to place my complex coordinates there.
It is very simple.
We can do complex additions there if we want.
Z=(a+a')+i(b+b').
Now, if we talk about products of complexes, it is not the same thing.
We must place a second axis in the horizontal plane x'2Ox2, similar to x'Ox, with its own counter-axis i'Oi, without needing to touch y'Oy which remains as is.
We will therefore be able, on this horizontal plane, to practice the multiplication of complex numbers.
This has nothing to do with Gaussian geometry, which is "something else".

It has nothing to do with anything, it is 100% inconsistent bullshit. As usual with Dr Hachel/Lengrand. The ice on the cake being more confusion, more inconsistency and more lies. Again, as usual with Dr Hachel/Lengrand.