That’s what he wrote, I imagine.
Comment on Conversing with Mathematicians
pr06lefs@lemmy.ml 11 months ago
What about plain old x = -10?
-10 ^ 2 = 100 -10 ^ 3 = -1000 -10 ^ 5 = -100000
Enkers@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Siethron@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It is, but with imaginary numbets
gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 11 months ago
numbet
Septimaeus@infosec.pub 11 months ago
numberwang
JackbyDev@programming.dev 11 months ago
i² = -1 so…
thedudeabides@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Nothing gets past you eh?
pr06lefs@lemmy.ml 11 months ago
people being pedantic showoffs doesn’t really register as humor for me, TBH
thedudeabides@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
That’s true, the OOP is being quite snarky with their comment on a post where someone’s had a genuine basic doubt
dwindling7373@feddit.it 11 months ago
10 * i^2 is -10.
Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 11 months ago
of course, but this problem is solvable without any understanding of complex numbers, and 10*i^2 is a really clunky, multi-operation expression whereas -10 is just an integer.
simplifying one’s answers is standard practice and any grader who received the answer in the OP would be obligated to point out that while technically correct, they’re missing the basic fact that the answer is -10.
The Rube Goldberg comment is apt as the solution is absurdly complicated and overengineered for the task it performs.
dwindling7373@feddit.it 11 months ago
Yes that’s what the thing you are looking at is built upon.
aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 11 months ago
Yeah exactly you’re right, why overcomplicate the problem like the Reddit comment did? I guess that’s just typical Reddit thinking that being pendantic and using lots of fancy words and long explanations makes you smart.
Krauerking@lemy.lol 11 months ago
Nah just boiler plate autism.
Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 11 months ago
no
Deconceptualist@lemm.ee 11 months ago
That was my immediate thought too.
Sphks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Boooooring
Redacted@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Isn’t that the joke?