![]() |
Not for the faint of art. |
Complex Numbers A complex number is expressed in the standard form a + bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is defined by i^2 = -1 (that is, i is the square root of -1). For example, 3 + 2i is a complex number. The bi term is often referred to as an imaginary number (though this may be misleading, as it is no more "imaginary" than the symbolic abstractions we know as the "real" numbers). Thus, every complex number has a real part, a, and an imaginary part, bi. Complex numbers are often represented on a graph known as the "complex plane," where the horizontal axis represents the infinity of real numbers, and the vertical axis represents the infinity of imaginary numbers. Thus, each complex number has a unique representation on the complex plane: some closer to real; others, more imaginary. If a = b, the number is equal parts real and imaginary. Very simple transformations applied to numbers in the complex plane can lead to fractal structures of enormous intricacy and astonishing beauty. |
https://www.brainpickings.org/2018/11/08/g-k-chesterton-heretics/ I'm not well-versed in philosophy. It's not that I'm not interested. I'm interested in a lot of things. It's just that I don't have the background. So when I see an article like this, I'm not afraid to admit I'm out of my depth. Just as a lot of people I talked to can't deal with mathematics - a position I can't relate to, but accept - I struggle with philosophical language. Philosophers build on earlier philosophers, on science, on religious thought to expand upon, or tear down, what has come before. Unlike math, philosophy, by its very nature, has no definitive answer. Unlike science, there's no rigorous testing and retesting of hypotheses with philosophy. It's ambiguous, and I'm not comfortable with ambiguity. Worse, my technical background has left little room for learning how to contextualize ambiguous thought processes. When it stops being ambiguous, it becomes science. Physics used to be called "natural philosophy." So - I have no doubt that what the author of the linked article is saying is important (whether I end up agreeing or disagreeing), but I'm having trouble unpacking it. Maybe someone reading this has some insight? |