mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

> by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
> around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary math....
> the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
> course there is no negative i either.

not true, Science sees human as weeds, and food poisons are weed killers
for depopulation

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 2:04:45 PM UTC-7, Tadd Muraro wrote:
> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
> > around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary math....
> > the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
> > course there is no negative i either.
>
> not true,

There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north pole. Remember?

On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 2:04:45 PM UTC-7, Tadd Muraro wrote:
>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
>>> around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary math....
>>> the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
>>> course there is no negative i either.
>>
>> not true,
>
> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north pole. Remember?

You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
whole world.

On Wednesday, 17 August 2022 at 21:44:07 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
> On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 2:04:45 PM UTC-7, Tadd Muraro wrote:
> >> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
> >>> around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary math....
> >>> the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
> >>> course there is no negative i either.
> >>
> >> not true,
> >
> > There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
> > Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north pole. Remember?
> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> accounts, etc., Roy.

And the insane mumble of your idiot guru is
still inconsistent, Mike.

mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

>> > the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and
>> > of course there is no negative i either.
>>
>> not true,
>
> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a limit
> at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north
> pole. Remember?

yes sure, absolutely. But the subtraction is not negative either. You
subtract from the larger the smaller. This is how the dynamics works.

On 8/17/2022 2:44 PM, Volney wrote:
> On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 2:04:45 PM UTC-7, Tadd Muraro wrote:
>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
>>>> around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary
>>>> math....
>>>> the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
>>>> course there is no negative i either.
>>>
>>> not true,
>>
>> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a
>> limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
>> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north
>> pole. Remember?
>
> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
> whole world.

Without quite siding with mitch, there is some truth to his discussion.

For example, there is no true negative temperature. Yes, we set scales
such that there are "negative temperatures," but those are just
arbitrary scales. A negative electrical charge, again, is just a name,
overrun bank accounts are a human construct.

In the strictest sense, negatives are either human constructs or a
matter of scaling.

Yes, mitch has psychological problems and he usually does a very
poor job of expressing himself, but the raw fact is that it isn't
turtles, or negative quantities, all the way down.

Of course if we actually understood the real nature of things like time
and space, that could change. But given our knowledge at this juncture,
real negatives do not exist within our present grasp of nature.

Relatively fresh out of college I had a discussion with a senior
engineer about zero. His knowledge was limited to the Volney sort of
discussion we see above. As young and relatively ignorant as I was at
that time I already knew enough to dismiss his discussion and allow him
to continue on his merry path through life, because educating him would
not have resulted in any worthwhile results.

The individual who understands the factual nature of zero and infinity
is legions ahead of the rest of humanity in that context. That's not to
say that the quality of life of the other 99+% is in any way diminished
by comparison.

The challenge that can naturally be raised by this sort of a discussion
is for someone to show me negative gravity or negative time that's not
merely a scaling issue.

Volney wrote:

> On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a
>> limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
>> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north
>> pole. Remember?
>
> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
> whole world.

pull my finger. That's *credit*, the overdrawn bank accounts. Which is
*positive*, troll. No brain at you whatsoever.

*pull_my_finger* Volney wrote:

> On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a
>> limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
>> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north
>> pole. Remember?
>
> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
> whole world.

negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.

you changed you polish name arriving in america. Same thing.

On Wednesday, 17 August 2022 at 23:18:49 UTC+2, whodat wrote:
> On 8/17/2022 2:44 PM, Volney wrote:
> > On 8/17/2022 2:20 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 2:04:45 PM UTC-7, Tadd Muraro wrote:
> >>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> by i you have a formula that has no solution... Stop moving your i
> >>>> around The complex plane is just the extension of the imaginary
> >>>> math....
> >>>> the best man can do is pretend that what has no solution does... and of
> >>>> course there is no negative i either.
> >>>
> >>> not true,
> >>
> >> There are no negatives outside of the subtraction operation with a
> >> limit at zero. subtracting more at zero is an overshoot in math...
> >> Nothing is below absolute zero. Just as there is no north of the north
> >> pole. Remember?
> >
> > You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> > accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
> > whole world.
> Without quite siding with mitch, there is some truth to his discussion.
>
> For example, there is no true negative temperature. Yes, we set scales
> such that there are "negative temperatures," but those are just
> arbitrary scales. A negative electrical charge, again, is just a name,
> overrun bank accounts are a human construct.

In opposition to the Laws of Physics, which are obviously
a construct of giants - demigods.

Michael Moroney wrote:

>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>> whole world.
>>
>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>
> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.

"math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
idiot. Braindead.

On 8/18/2022 10:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
> Michael Moroney wrote:
>
>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>> whole world.
>>>
>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>
>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>
> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
> idiot. Braindead.

All math is artificial. Some of it represents (models) nature.

On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 8:58:24 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 10:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
> > Michael Moroney wrote:
> >
> >>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
> >>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
> >>>> whole world.
> >>>
> >>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
> >>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
> >>
> >> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
> >> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
> >
> > "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
> > friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
> > idiot. Braindead.
> All math is artificial. Some of it represents (models) nature.
"artificial" might be the wrong descriptor, whodat. All math (arithmetic on the integers and higher) is "inconsistent" is a better way to put things. The interesting aspect here is that it absolutely requires inconsistency to model nature.

On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
> Michael Moroney wrote:
>
>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>> whole world.
>>>
>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>
>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>
> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
> idiot. Braindead.

What bank do you use?

On 8/18/2022 11:23 AM, patdolan wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2022 at 8:58:24 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 10:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>>>> whole world.
>>>>>
>>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
>>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>>
>>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>>
>>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>> idiot. Braindead.
>> All math is artificial. Some of it represents (models) nature.

> "artificial" might be the wrong descriptor, whodat. All math
> (arithmetic on the integers and higher) is "inconsistent" is > better way to put things. The interesting aspect here is that it
> absolutely requires inconsistency to model nature.

You've expressed a viewpoint that I discovered isn't arguable.

On 8/18/2022 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>
>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>>> whole world.
>>>>
>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if you
>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>
>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>
>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>> idiot. Braindead.
>
> What bank do you use?

Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?

It takes all kinds.

On 8/18/2022 12:21 PM, whodat wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>>>> whole world.
>>>>>
>>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if
>>>>> you
>>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>>
>>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>>
>>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>
>> What bank do you use?
>
> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>
> It takes all kinds.

Indeed. It's fun to expose points of a fractal to a field. Here is some
of my code running real time. Try to drag a point around the field:

https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdcyRs

Does my WebGL program work for you?

On 8/18/2022 12:31 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 12:21 PM, whodat wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> whole world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue*
>>>>>> if you
>>>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>>
>>> What bank do you use?
>>
>> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>>
>> It takes all kinds.
>
> Indeed. It's fun to expose points of a fractal to a field. Here is some
> of my code running real time. Try to drag a point around the field:
>
> https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdcyRs
>
> Does my WebGL program work for you?

Oh shit. I linked you to my GLSL program in a shader. Some of my WebGL
work can be found here:

http://fractallife247.com/test/webgl/

Can you see it?

On 8/18/2022 3:21 PM, whodat wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on the
>>>>>> whole world.
>>>>>
>>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue* if
>>>>> you
>>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>>
>>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>>
>>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>
>> What bank do you use?
>
> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>
> It takes all kinds.

I don't know about you, but I'd love to have a bank where if I overdrew
an account by 50k I'd still have a positive balance!

Volney wrote:

>>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>>
>>> What bank do you use?
>>
>> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>> It takes all kinds.
>
> I don't know about you, but I'd love to have a bank where if I overdrew
> an account by 50k I'd still have a positive balance!

this idiot is saying the money in his pocket are negative. Go ahead and
show some negative money in a bank and everywhere.

On 8/18/2022 3:08 PM, Volney wrote:
> On 8/18/2022 3:21 PM, whodat wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 1:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 8/18/2022 8:46 AM, Edkah Veronesi wrote:
>>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> You still can't explain negative electric charges, overdrawn bank
>>>>>>> accounts, etc., Roy. Quit trying to project your own stupidity on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> whole world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> negative electric charges are a property, you may call it *blue*
>>>>>> if you
>>>>>> wish. Nothing negative in it, troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> Silence, nymshifter. I did not give you permission to speak.
>>>>> Charge follows the math of negative/positive numbers. "Blue" doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> "math of negative/positive numbers" it's a credit account in a bank, my
>>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>>
>>> What bank do you use?
>>
>> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>>
>> It takes all kinds.
>
> I don't know about you, but I'd love to have a bank where if I overdrew
> an account by 50k I'd still have a positive balance!

Please recognize that *all* bank accounts merely represent indebtedness.
Either the bank has your money or you have theirs.

Overdrafts are a way of life in some circles. Negative money does not
exist. The direction of indebtedness is a human construct, it is never
the impossible negative money.

Overdrafts are one such circumstance. My credit union provides an
automatic credit card account (card available on request) to all
checking account holders so that interest can be accumulated on
overdrafts if they last more than 30 days. I worked once as a
financial officer for a firm where the balances were large enough
that reasonable overdrafts (and yes, $50K was within that range)
were simply ignored. The bank was The Chase. When your business gets
to that sort of size you too will understand how, and why, it all
works, or you can learn in other ways.

The main reason that banks have customer deposits is so that they are
able to lend out the idle portion of the depositors balances at a
profit. Brief incursions on that ability are ignored and forgiven if
a particular depositor's balance is large enough and usually stable
enough that the bank achieves a target profit on the account.

Your representation is a clear demonstration of how sometimes people
confuse a model with a reality, or perhaps sometimes they don't actually
get the underlying principles as appears in this instance, or both.

A "negative bank balance" doesn't actually exist, it is actually a loan
that may or might not be independently documented. If you work on the
bank's side of things, credits and debits are actually reverse of what
the average consumer is used to seeing.

The information above is correct. Whether or not any particular reader
is capable of absorbing and understanding these facts is the only
remaining question. I wish you well.

On 8/18/2022 3:33 PM, Swen Motta wrote:
> Volney wrote:
>
>>>>> friend. You may have 50k whatever, but you may draw 100k. You fucking
>>>>> idiot. Braindead.
>>>>
>>>> What bank do you use?
>>>
>>> Clever, you get your models of math and science from bank practices?
>>> It takes all kinds.
>>
>> I don't know about you, but I'd love to have a bank where if I overdrew
>> an account by 50k I'd still have a positive balance!
>
> this idiot is saying the money in his pocket are negative. Go ahead and
> show some negative money in a bank and everywhere.

The money in his pocket is actually "value" owed to him by the
government that issued the currency. The neat thing about
currency is that the underlying value can be freely traded.

whodat wrote:

> For example, there is no true negative temperature.

Plain false, in multiple respects.

> Yes, we set scales such that there are "negative temperatures," but those
> are just arbitrary scales.

Not at all. For example, 0 K corresponds to the temperature at which
constituent particles do not move at all except as allowed by the
uncertainty principle.

Further (light) reading:

<https://openstax.org/books/university-physics-volume-2/pages/2-2-pressure-temperature-and-rms-speed>

Likewise, negative absolute temperatures do not corresponds to states of
less heat than at 0 K, but more (and even infinitely much), but that
description only makes sense if a system has a maximum energy state.

See also: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature>

> A negative electrical charge, again, is just a name,

It is not just a name, because as all scientific terms, it carries a well-
defined meeaning (within in a certain context); in this case a mathematical
meaning. Because we found a good mathematical description for the behavior
of electrically charged bodies, which we ascribe to the number of elementary
electric charges, and the differences between those numbers, in them.

The electric/electrostatic force between two point-like electric charges
(that is a model, of course) is given by Coulomb’s Law:

F⃗ = 1/(4π ε₀) Q₁ Q₂/(r⃗₁₂)² r⃗₁₂/r₁₂.

where r⃗₁₂ is the vector that points (for lack of a better term) from body 1
to body 2, and r₁₂ is its magnitude.

If we say that the two bodies have opposite electric charge (e.g. Q₁ > 0, Q₂
< 0), then one can see that, because of multiplication,

F⃗ = −k r⃗₁₂/r₁₂,

where k > 0 is a proportionality constant corresponding to the magnitude of
the electric charges Q₁ and Q₂. IOW, if we say that body 1 is in the origin
of our coordinate system, and held there, then body 2 is attracted by it,
moving towards the origin. Which is what we observe.

Likewise, if both have an electric charge with the same sign (either Q₁, Q₂
> 0 or Q₁, Q₂ < 0), then, for the same reason,

F⃗ = k' r⃗₁₂/r₁₂,

where again k' > 0 is a proportionality constant corresponding to the
magnitude of the charges. IOW, body 2 is repelled by body 1, as we observe
body 2 moving away from the origin if body 1 is held there.

(And as body 2 is accelerated exactly (as best as can be measured) in the
way that this equation describes – proportional to the magnitude of the
charges and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between
them – it is a very good description.)

Further (light) reading:

<https://openstax.org/books/university-physics-volume-2/pages/5-introduction> pp.

> overrun bank accounts are a human construct.

That is a very simplistic, IMHO an overly simplistic argumentation.

> In the strictest sense, negatives are either human constructs or a
> matter of scaling.

Nonsense.
> Of course if we actually understood the real nature of things like time
> and space, that could change.

Before talking about the “real nature”, you should study the describable
nature first, as your understanding about that is sorely lacking.

> But given our knowledge at this juncture, real negatives do not exist
> within our present grasp of nature.

Blind leading the blind.

PointedEars
--
Q: What happens when electrons lose their energy?
A: They get Bohr'ed.

(from: WolframAlpha)

On 8/18/2022 7:43 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> whodat wrote:
>
>> For example, there is no true negative temperature.
>
> Plain false, in multiple respects.

Although I read the rest of your offering, that exercise was a
waste of my time. You offered nothing of value.

<snip crap>

whodat wrote:

> On 8/18/2022 7:43 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> whodat wrote:
>>> For example, there is no true negative temperature.
>> Plain false, in multiple respects.
>
> Although I read the rest of your offering,

It was not an offering, but an (albeit lengthy) correction of the nonsense
that you said. This is not a bazaar :-D

> that exercise was a waste of my time.

Yes, apparently you are lacking the cognitive abilities to understand it.

> You offered nothing of value.

You are not in a position to make a sound judgment as your statements show
that you are utterly incompetent in these matters, too. A typical example
of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

PointedEars
--
Q: What did the female magnet say to the male magnet?
A: From the back, I found you repulsive, but from the front
I find myself very attracted to you.
(from: WolframAlpha)