This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2012. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
I have a masters degree in electronic engineering; when performing calculations using complex numbers we use the letter j to represent the square root of minus one as i is already reserved for use when handling electric current.
I have tried to add this to the Wikipedia article several times in different parts of the article but it keeps being deleted.
Please explain why? 2A02:C7C:6A71:C100:19F5:FA75:1F7C:7685 ( talk) 09:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I'd say that "labeled" is American and "labelled" is British. Some random web page agrees with me. — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 22:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
The first footnote links to a textbook on archive.org which is no longer available. -- Rpresser 00:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
What is the difference between imaginary number and imaginary unit? of Wikipedia The name of another article is imaginary number. Aren't these two articles about the same thing? The most logical thing to do is to merge the articles (or delete one of them). Bera678 ( talk) 16:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I did the edit of the "Imaginary unit" article https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Imaginary_unit&oldid=1191290048.
- Charles Ewan Milner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Ewan Milner ( talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Powers of i come after a few things in the properties section. But shouldn't this be at the top? Aren't the powers of i the most important among these? Bera678 ( talk) 16:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Although somewhat trivial, addition, subtraction (of imaginary units or imaginary units with real numbers), and scalar multiplication (of an imaginary unit by a real number) are not covered in this article. Should they be?— Anita5192 ( talk) 17:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I am used to seeing terms like 2πni; that is the real number is first, then mathematical constants, then variables, and then the imaginary i. (Well, if any of those factors is itself more complicated than a single letter then that can change the ordering ... but ignoring that for now.) But, we don't seem to be using that, at least not consistently. If we go for a consistent order, what order would you like to see? For example, do you like πi or iπ? 2πi or 2iπ? 2πni or 2πin or ...? — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 19:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
In the section "Other operations", I liked having the short list of operations that remain (single-valued) functions when i is used. Finding an example there reassures the reader that these particular examples do not fall into the other category, "many functions involving i are complex multi-valued functions". — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 22:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
In the picture, the representation of the imaginary number on the number line is given. Don't you think it would be better to focus this picture directly on the imaginary number? For example, we can put the letter 'i'(as in math template). Bera678 ( talk) 18:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Another possible image we could use (either in the lead or later on) is some kind of graphical representation of a quarter-turn rotation in the plane. – jacobolus (t) 17:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
The reference "Grassmann’s Vision" by Hestenes says, "the imaginary unit i must be interpreted as the unit bivector for the plane containing a and b, something Grassmann never realized." Given that this subsection put forward to motivate use of the imaginary unit relies on Hestenes speculation and links to Geometric algebra and Bivectors for foundation, it is unsupported mathematically. Remarks are invited concerning this subsection motivating imaginary units. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
The notion of a ratio of directed line segments was taken by W.R. Hamilton as the foundation of his quaternion algebra ( Lectures on Quaternions, page 110) where he connects the subject with astronomy (orbit of a comet). In the preface to the Lectures there is a description of his conception of complex numbers as couples (x,y) where the imaginary unit is (0,1) and a rule of multiplication is given (see Preface, page 10). Since complex numbers were already in wide use in 1853, the preface reviews several authors' approaches to foundations of complex numbers. At page 60 of the preface, the ratio of vectors is previewed. Lloyd Kannenberg has translated Grassmann into English. Can support for the Grassmann-Hestenes unit be found there? Hamilton (1853) mentions Grassmann (1844) only once in a footnote. — Rgdboer ( talk) 23:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
It should be mentioned in the article that
It is common sense to include this. 176.10.136.252 ( talk) 13:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2012. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
I have a masters degree in electronic engineering; when performing calculations using complex numbers we use the letter j to represent the square root of minus one as i is already reserved for use when handling electric current.
I have tried to add this to the Wikipedia article several times in different parts of the article but it keeps being deleted.
Please explain why? 2A02:C7C:6A71:C100:19F5:FA75:1F7C:7685 ( talk) 09:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I'd say that "labeled" is American and "labelled" is British. Some random web page agrees with me. — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 22:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
The first footnote links to a textbook on archive.org which is no longer available. -- Rpresser 00:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
What is the difference between imaginary number and imaginary unit? of Wikipedia The name of another article is imaginary number. Aren't these two articles about the same thing? The most logical thing to do is to merge the articles (or delete one of them). Bera678 ( talk) 16:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I did the edit of the "Imaginary unit" article https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Imaginary_unit&oldid=1191290048.
- Charles Ewan Milner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Ewan Milner ( talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Powers of i come after a few things in the properties section. But shouldn't this be at the top? Aren't the powers of i the most important among these? Bera678 ( talk) 16:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Although somewhat trivial, addition, subtraction (of imaginary units or imaginary units with real numbers), and scalar multiplication (of an imaginary unit by a real number) are not covered in this article. Should they be?— Anita5192 ( talk) 17:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I am used to seeing terms like 2πni; that is the real number is first, then mathematical constants, then variables, and then the imaginary i. (Well, if any of those factors is itself more complicated than a single letter then that can change the ordering ... but ignoring that for now.) But, we don't seem to be using that, at least not consistently. If we go for a consistent order, what order would you like to see? For example, do you like πi or iπ? 2πi or 2iπ? 2πni or 2πin or ...? — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 19:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
In the section "Other operations", I liked having the short list of operations that remain (single-valued) functions when i is used. Finding an example there reassures the reader that these particular examples do not fall into the other category, "many functions involving i are complex multi-valued functions". — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 22:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
In the picture, the representation of the imaginary number on the number line is given. Don't you think it would be better to focus this picture directly on the imaginary number? For example, we can put the letter 'i'(as in math template). Bera678 ( talk) 18:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Another possible image we could use (either in the lead or later on) is some kind of graphical representation of a quarter-turn rotation in the plane. – jacobolus (t) 17:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
The reference "Grassmann’s Vision" by Hestenes says, "the imaginary unit i must be interpreted as the unit bivector for the plane containing a and b, something Grassmann never realized." Given that this subsection put forward to motivate use of the imaginary unit relies on Hestenes speculation and links to Geometric algebra and Bivectors for foundation, it is unsupported mathematically. Remarks are invited concerning this subsection motivating imaginary units. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
The notion of a ratio of directed line segments was taken by W.R. Hamilton as the foundation of his quaternion algebra ( Lectures on Quaternions, page 110) where he connects the subject with astronomy (orbit of a comet). In the preface to the Lectures there is a description of his conception of complex numbers as couples (x,y) where the imaginary unit is (0,1) and a rule of multiplication is given (see Preface, page 10). Since complex numbers were already in wide use in 1853, the preface reviews several authors' approaches to foundations of complex numbers. At page 60 of the preface, the ratio of vectors is previewed. Lloyd Kannenberg has translated Grassmann into English. Can support for the Grassmann-Hestenes unit be found there? Hamilton (1853) mentions Grassmann (1844) only once in a footnote. — Rgdboer ( talk) 23:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
It should be mentioned in the article that
It is common sense to include this. 176.10.136.252 ( talk) 13:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)