bassam king karzeddin wrote: > On Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 6:01:04 PM UTC+3, Python wrote: >> bassam king karzeddin wrote: >>> On Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 5:40:11 PM UTC+3, Python wrote: >>>> bassam king karzeddin wrote: >>>>> It was like this, Let us decide that (i^2 = - 1), and see later how >>>>> much business mathematics huge volumes we can milk out from that stupid >>>>> and meaningless decision >>>> >>>> What about learning how complex numbers are defined instead of making >>>> a fool of yourself, Mr Karzeddin? >>>> >>>> C = R[X]/I where R[X] is the set of polynomials on real numbers and >>>> I is the ideal generated by the polynomial X^2 + 1. i is the equivalence >>>> class containing the polynomial X. >>>> >>>> It is then easy to prove that C is a field and that i^2 is the >>>> equivalence class of the polynomial -1. Nothing mysterious in that. >>> >>> Also, it is useless ... >> >> ... to try to educate a stubborn arrogant idiot like you. For sure, >> wonder! >> >> Everyone can notice that you have absolutely NO argument against the >> algebraic construction of the set of complex numbers. > > Moron, basically there isn't any negative numbers
Pay attention, Mr Karzeddin, the point was about complex numbers, not relative interger. Nevertheless the *facts* are the same, they can both be constructed in a perfectly sound way. You may deny it while putting your hands on your ears crying "I do not hear! I do not hear!", that won't change anything about that.