Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit4.readnews.com!panix!not-for-mail From: Grant Edwards Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Complex literals (was Re: I am never going to complain about Python again) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:54:28 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl.comtrol.com X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1381424068 846 64.122.56.22 (10 Oct 2013 16:54:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:54:28 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:56592 On 2013-10-10, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Grant Edwards wrote: >> Nope. "i" is electical current (though it's more customary to use >> upper case). "j" is the square root of -1. >> >>> and that hypercomplex numbers include i, j, k, and maybe even other >>> terms, and I never understood where j comes from. Why is Python >>> better for using j? >> >> Because that's the way we do it in electrical engineering. > > Okay, so hold on a minute... a hypercomplex number is the sum of a > real number, some electrical current, an imaginary number, and k? I don't know that EE's ever encounter hypercomplex numbers (I certainly never have), nor does Python support them, so in _practice_ there isn't really a conflict. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I want EARS! I want at two ROUND BLACK EARS gmail.com to make me feel warm 'n secure!!