Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: "David R Tribble" <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Jan 2006 12:04:13 -0800
Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>> If you're speaking of the change of sign of the imaginary, that's
>> meaningless. Any solution to x^x equals a real number has another
>> solution with the opposite sign on the imaginary, i.e. the complex
>> conjugate.
>
Quasi wrote:
>> Is this obvious?
>> Even if it is, can you explain it a little?
>
Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>> I have a simpler explanation than the other two people who answered you.
>>
>> There is absolutely nothing that distinguishes i from -i. They're
>> not equal to each other, but in any valid equation whatsoever, if
>> you replace every i with -i and vice versa, it will still be valid.
>
Quasi wrote:
> It may be simpler, but I don't buy this explanation, sorry.
>
> To say that when an equation has z as a solution then it also has
> conjugate(z) as a solution, implies that the one solution induces a
> second. That's not immediate from the indistinguishability of i and
> -i. It really depends on the form of the equation.
I'm certainly no expert, but surely (-i)^(-i) is not the same as i^i,
is it?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: Robert Israel
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- References:
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: quasi
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- From: quasi
- Re: x^x = 1/4
- Prev by Date: Re: beginner set theory question
- Next by Date: Re: Finding simple cycles approximating target distance
- Previous by thread: Re: x^x = 1/4
- Next by thread: Re: x^x = 1/4
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|