Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- From: "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:01:24 +0200
Androcles <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
e9jjk.76613$8t7.37794@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
"harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotThis@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1217244260_798@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in message news:g6k7qu$r2l$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
Yes, in a sloppy way of speakOing, but *the* square root of a
positive real number is defined as a positive number and it is unique.
sq.rt.(16) = 4 or -4.
No, we write
sqrt(16) = 4
and
-sqrt(16) = -4
Dirk Vdm
It's storm in a wine (or whine) glass:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root
Harald
It's a sloppy way of speakOing.
Dork is a sloppy, ignorant, pathetic local village idiot, like you.
Better a sloppy way of speakOing than an non-existent way of thinking:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtRev.html
Dirk Vdm
.
- References:
- On the muliplication of negative numbers
- From: Uncle Ben
- Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- From: harry
- Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- From: Androcles
- On the muliplication of negative numbers
- Prev by Date: Re: Where is the mathematical beauty of relativity !!!
- Next by Date: Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?
- Previous by thread: Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- Next by thread: Re: On the muliplication of negative numbers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
