Zulip Chat Archive

Stream: maths

Topic: 2 * pi * I


view this post on Zulip Johan Commelin (Sep 25 2020 at 16:12):

Does it make sense to create a definition two_pi_I := 2 * pi * I? That might make it easier to cancel it, or move it through equations with assoc and comm.

view this post on Zulip Adam Topaz (Sep 25 2020 at 16:22):

two_pi_I is really an atomic object from the motivic point of view anyway...

view this post on Zulip Adam Topaz (Sep 25 2020 at 16:31):

Should pi_I also be defined?

view this post on Zulip Adam Topaz (Sep 25 2020 at 16:34):

cf. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=F08AC5D8B8FC84D8E9550EF79DE4DEC9?doi=10.1.1.211.2712&rep=rep1&type=pdf

view this post on Zulip Chris Hughes (Sep 25 2020 at 17:06):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPv1UV0rD8U

view this post on Zulip Kevin Buzzard (Sep 25 2020 at 17:31):

The fundamental period is 2*pi*I, right?

view this post on Zulip Johan Commelin (Sep 25 2020 at 17:31):

The lack of this definition is what is blocking us from doing complex analysis :rofl:


Last updated: May 14 2021 at 18:28 UTC