Search where?

This Portfolio (cathartes02)

All of Writing.Com

◄ October ► 2022
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30	31
Archive				RSS

Offsite Blogs

· Waltz Travel Blog

Create New Item

Read & Review

Community

Browse By Type

Browse By Genre

Writing Resources

Tuesday, May. 7, 2024

10:23pm EDT

Members: 888

Guests: 881

Total Online: 1,769

Complex Numbers

by Robert Waltz

Rated: 18+ · Book · Personal · #1196512

Not for the faint of art.

Complex Numbers

A complex number is expressed in the standard form a + bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is defined by i^2 = -1 (that is, i is the square root of -1). For example, 3 + 2i is a complex number.

The bi term is often referred to as an imaginary number (though this may be misleading, as it is no more "imaginary" than the symbolic abstractions we know as the "real" numbers). Thus, every complex number has a real part, a, and an imaginary part, bi.

Complex numbers are often represented on a graph known as the "complex plane," where the horizontal axis represents the infinity of real numbers, and the vertical axis represents the infinity of imaginary numbers. Thus, each complex number has a unique representation on the complex plane: some closer to real; others, more imaginary. If a = b, the number is equal parts real and imaginary.

Very simple transformations applied to numbers in the complex plane can lead to fractal structures of enormous intricacy and astonishing beauty.

http://www.ddewey.net/mandelbrot/

Signature for Honorable Mentions in 2018 Quill Awards

A signature for exclusive use of winners at the 2019 Quill Awards

Signature for those who have won a Quill Award at the 2020 Quill Awards

Show Recent Comments

10 Most Recent Blog Comments:

🌕 HuntersMoon

May 5, 2024 at 8:50am
In response to "Revisited: "Fail""

Shame on you for making fun of the Hoggs. Being a Virginian, Bob, you should know the reverence that the name Hog inspires recalling the glory days of the Washington Redskins (now the Commanders). The Hogs

1 Like

Charity Marie - <3

May 4, 2024 at 5:42pm
In response to "Overdraft Dodgers"

I have four different accounts and each one has a purpose. Savings, personal debit card, auto draft debit card, and a b8lls account. The bills account is the only one that can overdraft as it's for manual big bills like rent, cell, electric, etc. Stuff that mist be paid. The rest are blocked from overdraft and the savings account has no debit card attached. My bank accounts have been hacked too many times so I keep it this way to protect myself. It is very rare I ever pay an overdraft. I have a money market account for money greater than $10K so it gains interest and isn't touched except emergencies. That is a secure account too.

1 Like

Kåre Enga in Montana

May 3, 2024 at 4:23pm
In response to "It's a Crime"

Thailand versus Montana versus New York versus Costa Rica.

Theft? Not in Thailand! Not a huge concern in Missoula, perhaps in NYC, definitely an issue in Costa Rica.

Violence? Not a huge concern in Thailand. More so in MT, NY and CR (where it wasn't a concern years ago), definitely a problem in Saint Louis and the US in general. El Salvador is known for violence.

Death by vehicle. Not a huge concern in either NY or MT. A rising problem in Costa Rica. Thailand is one of the worst places in the world in this respect.

You may be shot and killed in parts of the US but you're more likely to be run-over in Thailand.

1 Like

Simply Me

May 3, 2024 at 11:58am
In response to "It's a Crime"

I get it. The fear spreading jerks wants us to have an "us vs. them" attitude. The division gives them leverage. (they think)

1 Like

🌕 HuntersMoon

May 2, 2024 at 11:37am
In response to "Butt Of Course"

My wife tried waterskiing once... called it the 100-yard douche.

Talk about retaining water...

2 Like

Elisa the Bunny Stik

May 1, 2024 at 10:53am
In response to "Mad as Hell"

"But if you want to really see how anger is useful, you need to consider how it's used as a tool for manipulation."

This is a line that must be regarded with care. After all, there are people that get angry about the way they are being treated on a large scale and harness that anger to change their circumstances. There is some level of manipulation in this angry but still legitimate flavor of activism. We do have to consider the possibility that this angel's usefulness can have net benefits (such as environmental cleanup and protection; see the Live Canal as an example).

GeminiGem survived GoT

Apr 29, 2024 at 1:53pm
In response to "Supplementary"

Working in health care for a zillion years, I've heard it all. The whole thing about something being natural, therefore it would be good for a person is very, very, very...very prevalent. An internist I worked with had a fantastic comeback to that line of thinking. She would say, "Arsenic is natural, are you going to start taking that?"

1 Like

Lazy Writer est 4/24/2008

Apr 28, 2024 at 2:14pm
In response to "Revisited: "Exercise""

I will be 75 in July. My stepdaughter gave me a bike because I wanted to ride it again. Well, I started off shaky and stayed shaky...then I fell off it...A passing motorist stopped to help me get up...I have NOT been back on that bike and will not ever again.

🌕 HuntersMoon

Apr 28, 2024 at 10:43am
In response to "Revisited: "Exercise""

So, you're saying that now you pedal your ass differently?

Elisa the Bunny Stik

Apr 27, 2024 at 10:33am
In response to "Pleasure and Pain"

it illustrates why it's important to have people from different backgrounds, with different worldviews, working on scientific research.

This right here is why I get rather irritated by people poo-pooing college these days. I feel like that attitude effectively shits on minority populations that may not have strong finances but do possess persistent curiosity and want to learn about various subjects in-depth. In the 90s, these groups were exclusively told to go to trade schools even if they had the aptitude for college education. Nowadays the blanket "Everyone should consider a trade" mantra employs a more subtle (but still abundant) form of discrimination. I'm so over it.

1 Like

October 31, 2022 at 12:01am

#1040005

Eh? Okay.

When it comes to words, "correct" is a bit ambiguous.

Which one is correct: O.K., OK, ok, or okay?

Or should that read: "korrect" is a bit ambiguous?

In honor of the 182nd anniversary of the first-ever appearance in print of O.K. (in The Boston Morning Post) I am here to start an internet copyediting war.

Said anniversary was apparently last year, as this article dates from March 2021.

Also, "an internet copyediting war?" Right, like anything actually gets copyedited on the internet.

As you can see, the original “O.K.” was very clearly an acronym, in this case of “oll korrect,” a popular slang misspelling of “all correct” (we can probably blame this on the teens of the era).

Lest anyone think that teens making up expressions to piss off their stodgy elders is a new phenomenon.

As with most language that drifts into common usage, the origins of O.K. slowly receded from collective awareness and the word began to assume different shapes and sizes: the slightly more streamlined and dashing OK; the drawling and onomatopoetic okay; the abrupt and minimalist ok. (Who knows, maybe mmmkay will achieve formal status one day.)

And yes, the "oll korrect" origin story is disputed,

though that seems to be the leading hypothesis.

What's not in dispute is that it was made up at some point. All words were; it's just a matter of how long ago.

So what is a copyeditor to do? One of the best pieces of advice I ever got was from an old alt-weekly copyeditor at a bar, who didn’t really prescribe to this fixed style or that, but rather believed first and foremost in the “ugly rule.”

In truth, I'm pretty sure most style rules are the result of copyeditors going to bars. One thing I think most of them would agree on, though, drunk or sober, is that this author should have either used "...prescribe this fixed style or that..." or "...subscribe to this fixed style or that..." The way it's written makes no linguistic sense.

He held (correctly) that language and its rules are slippery and ever-changing, and that convention and usage should always supersede institutional formality.

While this may be "korrect," there's still no excuse for mixing up its and it's; there, their, and they're; or prescribe and subscribe.

So, within that admittedly wild and wooly ethos he came up with the Ugly Rule, which privileges the reader’s eye above all else, and seeks to minimize typographical distractions (in practical terms, the New Yorker’s truly eccentric insistence on diacritics is a direct and egregious violation of the rule).

Which is what I've been saying.

Whether it should be "wooly" or "woolly" is also up for debate.

He also believed that words, over time, tended to shed their size: compound hyphens disappeared, capitalization faded, and spaces closed up. Hence to-day became today, Band-Aid became band-aid, and (thank god) Web site is becoming website; and if these contractions were inevitable, why not just get in early?

They're not inevitable. But it is the way trends go in English. I've done entire blog entries on the phenomenon. Here's one that coincidentally (or is it ironically?) riffs off a New Yorker article: "Dashing"

Can you see where I’m going with this?

I can, but don't you get paid by the word?

This is why, as an editor, I prefer ok to OK or okay. Why fight it? Why waste the extra ink?

What ink?

The problem with ok is that it looks like it should be pronounced with one syllable, similar to oak or ach. The problem with O.K. is that it's absolutely archaic; hardly anyone puts periods into acronyms or abbreviations these days. OK is a decent compromise, but okay is closest to how the "word" is actually pronounced.

Full disclosure: I'm pretty sure I use them all interchangeably, but I think I lean more towards "okay."

I also had to go and look up some "texting rules" post I made several years ago, because I had a vague memory of being told not to use "k" for "okay." Here it is: "Unwritten, Expanded"

The important excerpt: "So... wait... we're supposed to, on the one hand, condense our texts into emojis and "u" for "you" and acronyms such as IDK or LOL or whatevs, but you're going to get pissed because someone typed "K" for "OK?" Good gods."

So, in conclusion, this author doesn't actually answer the headline question. My personal opinion? Look at how The New Yorker handles it, and do whatever they don't.

That'll be okay.

2 Like • Comment • View 2 comments

© Copyright 2024 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted Writing.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.

Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/profile/blog/cathartes02/day/10-31-2022