Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #56613 > unrolled thread

Re: Complex literals (was Re: I am never going to complain about Python again)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Complex literals (was Re: I am never going to complain about Python again) David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2013-10-11 09:44 +1100

#56613 — Re: Complex literals (was Re: I am never going to complain about Python again)

On 11 October 2013 06:29, Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I learned to use i for sqrt(-1) while studying theoretical physics.
> When I later found myself teaching maths to engineers I asked why j
> was used and was given this explanation. I'm still unconvinced by it
> though.

Please don't be. We need different symbols to distinguish between so
many different aspects of current (average, dynamic, instantaneous,
rms, peak, sinusoidal-amplitude, sinusoidal-phasor) that we use up all
possible variations of bold, italic, subscript just to distinguish those
different aspects of i. It gets confusing enough as it is, because typically
we are describing many current variables (in one or more of the above
aspects) simultaneously, not just one. And the same holds for current
density, but less common. That's why we prefer j for sqrt(-1), not because
we are unconvincing :)

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web