Comments on: Atheist Math and Imaginary Numbers http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/ by Hemant Mehta Mon, 28 May 2012 02:28:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: scikidus http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-241054 scikidus Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:13:07 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-241054 I like the new versions. I just thought this up a few days ago, and thought it would be nice to share it with the world. I didn't think it would be noticed so quickly! Actually, some of the comments in this thread have given me another idea. To Photoshop! I like the new versions. I just thought this up a few days ago, and thought it would be nice to share it with the world. I didn’t think it would be noticed so quickly!

Actually, some of the comments in this thread have given me another idea. To Photoshop!

]]> By: Pseudonym http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238940 Pseudonym Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:37:25 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238940 OK, I'm confused. Obviously this is not saying that God is pure imaginary, because the complex numbers are not an ordered field, and hence less-than doesn't make sense. So what's it actually saying? Surely not that God is timelike rather than to spacelike. This has interesting theological implications, but most people who write on the topic seem to agree that God is not bound by spacetime. OK, I’m confused. Obviously this is not saying that God is pure imaginary, because the complex numbers are not an ordered field, and hence less-than doesn’t make sense.

So what’s it actually saying?

Surely not that God is timelike rather than to spacelike. This has interesting theological implications, but most people who write on the topic seem to agree that God is not bound by spacetime.

]]> By: Ian http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238861 Ian Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:44:26 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238861 Wouldn't teaching this in class be hypocritical and also potentially a violation of the First Amendment (although atheism =/= religion, I could foresee arguments). Not that I thought you were serious. Wouldn’t teaching this in class be hypocritical and also potentially a violation of the First Amendment (although atheism =/= religion, I could foresee arguments).

Not that I thought you were serious.

]]> By: Brian S. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238734 Brian S. Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:20:07 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238734 What exactly does the modulus of a purely imaginary god tell us? What exactly does the modulus of a purely imaginary god tell us?

]]> By: Freak http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238727 Freak Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:12:57 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238727 "The Imaginary That Isn't", The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, March 1961. Reprinted in Asimov on Numbers. The teacher asked Asimov to hand him sqrt(-1) pieces of chalk. Asimov made the above challenge in reply. “The Imaginary That Isn’t”, The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, March 1961. Reprinted in Asimov on Numbers.

The teacher asked Asimov to hand him sqrt(-1) pieces of chalk. Asimov made the above challenge in reply.

]]> By: Bill http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238712 Bill Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:49:56 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238712 I'm reminded of a piece Azimov wrote about trying to convince one of his teachers that 1/2 is no less "imaginary" (in the ordinary everyday sense of the word) than <em>i</em>. He challenged the teacher to give him half a piece of chalk. The teacher promptly broke a piece of chalk in two and handed Azimov <em>one</em> of the two pieces. 8-) I’m reminded of a piece Azimov wrote about
trying to convince one of his teachers that
1/2 is no less “imaginary” (in the ordinary
everyday sense of the word) than i.
He challenged the teacher to give him half
a piece of chalk. The teacher promptly
broke a piece of chalk in two and handed
Azimov one of the two pieces. 8-)

]]> By: Moth http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238695 Moth Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:23:15 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238695 I just noticed tonight that Planet Atheist often aggregates the recent blog posts in groups of 66 (# of books in the Bible). I just noticed tonight that Planet Atheist often aggregates the recent blog posts in groups of 66 (# of books in the Bible).

]]> By: hoverFrog http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238520 hoverFrog Mon, 20 Oct 2008 05:53:02 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238520 Can you also represent the square root of god as a fraction? No, that would be <em>irrational</em>. <strong>Proof that god is not perfect.</strong> God is indivisible. yet, in order to be perfect God would need to be the sum of its proper positive divisors. Can you also represent the square root of god as a fraction? No, that would be irrational.

Proof that god is not perfect.
God is indivisible. yet, in order to be perfect God would need to be the sum of its proper positive divisors.

]]> By: Justin http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238469 Justin Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:37:22 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238469 @Tim Can one plug anything into that equation? Landlords? Ex-girlfriends? Tiny yipping dogs who won't shut up in the night when I'm needing to get up for work the next day? Hmm. Let x=flufftard... @Tim Can one plug anything into that equation? Landlords? Ex-girlfriends? Tiny yipping dogs who won’t shut up in the night when I’m needing to get up for work the next day?

Hmm. Let x=flufftard…

]]> By: efrique http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/10/19/atheist-math-and-imaginary-numbers/#comment-238380 efrique Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:27:23 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=5214#comment-238380 Is it: "<em>i</em> are the square root of -1", "<em>i</em> am the square root of -1", or "<em>i</em> am that i am the square root of -1"? Is it:
“i are the square root of -1″,
“i am the square root of -1″, or
“i am that i am the square root of -1″?

]]>