Re: Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- From: "czli" <aadove2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 23:24:52 +0800
"Anton Suchaneck" <asuchaneck@xxxxxx>
???????:d7hsmp$mdd$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> See the recent book "On Quaternions and
>> Octonions" by Conway and Smith for more information. There have been
>> articles by John Baez discussing physical applications, too.
> Sounds interesting. I hope those applications are not to far from
> practical
> applications.
> How can I find the articles by John Baez?
> Anton
http://www.ams.org/bull/2002-39-02/S0273-0979-01-00934-X/S0273-0979-01-00934-X.pdf
.
- References:
- Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- From: Anton Suchaneck
- Re: Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- From: gowan4@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- From: Anton Suchaneck
- Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Next by Date: Re: Generalisations of f^n(x)
- Previous by thread: Re: Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- Next by thread: Re: Why is there no *really* useful Algebra beyond complex numbers?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
