Complex Numbers (Book)

Blog Calendar

◄ May ►
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

About This Author

Contact Me

Come closer.

Complex Numbers

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:

tj-Merry Mischief Maker

about 14 hours ago
In response to "Gray Matters"

I wonder how many nine year old people have gray hair? I also wonder how much stress most nine year olds have?

3 Like

Wordsmitty ✍️

about 17 hours ago
In response to "Gray Matters"

"who were between age nine and 39," - so the old folks need the rejuvenation formula first to turn back the years.

I wonder if anyone has studied why hair goes gray in certain places and not everywhere. Maybe different kinds of stress?

3 Like

🌖 HuntersMoon

about 20 hours ago
In response to "Gray Matters"

I've always believed "better gray than gone away..."

2 Like

tj-Merry Mischief Maker

a day ago
In response to "A Mammoth Discovery"

This makes think of a book, "Evolution and Genomic Diversity" by Gene Poole.

1 Like

tj-Merry Mischief Maker

Dec 24, 2024 at 5:16pm
In response to "Hot Shoulder"

Maybe if we say, "Betelgeuse" three times in a row we can witness it.

1 Like

tj-Merry Mischief Maker

Dec 23, 2024 at 4:55pm
In response to "Trash Pandas"

Being an avid camper, keeping items out of the reach of raccoons can be challenging. We've had them figure out how to open coolers, open chests, and even gnaw through rope used to suspend a cooler out of their reach.

2 Like

🐕GeminiGem🎁

Dec 23, 2024 at 12:56pm
In response to "Trash Pandas"

I wrote one of my Danger Dog stories based on a childhood camping trip that involved a raccoon stealing grapes from our cooler "Danger Dog's Camping Capers"

I had always heard that cockroaches will be the only thing that survives a nuclear war/apocolypse, but maybe it will actually be the raccoons.

4 Like

🌖 HuntersMoon

Dec 23, 2024 at 10:04am
In response to "Trash Pandas"

Just wait until we team up with the cats...

4 Like

Jayngle Bells

Dec 23, 2024 at 10:03am
In response to "Trash Pandas"

The back of my property is sheltered by buildings and cedar trees, so I live on a "racoon highway." Tinfoil works until one takes it for the team and moves it. The only scent that somewhat deters then is ammonia - but they alter their path within the already preferred walkway, not avoid it completely. They generally leave the garbage bin alone, but that's because of the bears, not because of anything we do 😂

I've had more wildlife problems in the city than I ever did in the country. The first time I saw a deer up close? In the middle of my street directly in front of my house. Probably looking for the trash panda party. Lol

4 Like

Annette

Dec 21, 2024 at 11:59am
In response to "Neutral Zone"

It made me happy that I was able to like it. I take the small victories.

1 Like

May 10, 2024 at 9:59am

#1070838

Meditation Clause

Woke up with a case of gamer finger this morning. You know, when you sprain your finger from intermittently pushing the key that makes you go in the game? No? Damn, just me then. So I'd like to keep this short, but considering what I landed on today, I don't know if I'll be able to.

Are we morally obligated to meditate?
A growing body of neuroscience research shows that meditation can make us better to each other.

Just remember, my default response to headline questions is "no."

Starting in 2005, Harvard neuroscientist Sara Lazar began to publish some mind-blowing findings: Meditation can literally change the structure of your brain, thickening key areas of the cortex that help you control your attention and emotions.

Setting aside for the moment the ridiculous idea that "you" are some entity separate from your brain that can control it like a puppet, that finding, if true, is remarkable in itself. It'd be the brain equivalent of weight-lifting. The article does go on to mention follow-up studies, so there may be something to it.

Your brain — and possibly, by extension, your behavior — can reap the benefits if you practice meditation for half an hour a day over eight weeks.

Which might not be possible for everyone. As with exercise or recipe timing, the duration is misleadingly short. It takes time to prepare for these things, and more time to come down after. So you're looking at a 45-minute chunk of the day, maybe. Now, what are you willing to give up to get those 45 minutes? Sleep? If you do, you'll fall asleep trying to meditate (or, I don't know, maybe that's just me, too). Time with family? Dog-walking? Commute? Work? Lunch?

A host of other studies showed that meditation can also change your neural circuitry in ways that make you more compassionate, as well as more inclined to have positive feelings toward a victim of suffering and to see things from their perspective.

But what if you don't want to do all that?

Still skeptical, I fell down an internet rabbit hole and soon found many more neuroscientific studies. Looking closely at them, I did find that a fair number are methodologically flawed (more on that below). But there were many others that seemed sound.

See, this is what I look for in articles like this: some indication that the author didn't just accept whatever bullshit gets strewn about.

If it takes such a small amount of time and effort to get better at regulating my emotions, paying attention to other people, seeing things from their point of view, and acting altruistically, then … well … am I not morally obligated to do it?

That's not a science question. That's a philosophy question. But the whole next section of the article goes back to the science bit, which is worth reading, but I'm not quoting it here. So, provisionally accepting the science findings, I'm skipping to the philosophy section.

After I started wondering if we’re morally obligated to meditate, I soon realized that’s a very Western and Judeo-Christian way of thinking about it.

I would very much like for that hyphenated adjective to stop being used.

But Eastern traditions like Buddhism or Confucianism aren’t grounded in commandments that come from a divine being.

Neither are Western traditions. We've been conditioned to believe that the commandments came from a divine being. Which, from a practical perspective, I suppose produces the same results.

Plus, whereas the language of oughts and obligations suggests a prescriptive or proselytizing attitude, Buddhist tradition has generally been more interested in inviting people to try meditation and discover its benefits for themselves, rather than in mandating adherence.

Therein lurks an important difference between East and West.

I'd say this bit's important to note, too:

But there’s a caveat: For a small minority of people, meditation can actually provoke adverse effects, like intense mental distress or impaired physical functioning. Brown University psychologist Willoughby Britton is studying these cases in a project called “Varieties of Contemplative Experience.” More research is still needed, but given that meditation practices might precipitate or exacerbate challenging conditions in some people, it would be wrong to say that absolutely everyone would do well to meditate.

This is analogous to people urging us to get out and socialize more. That may be good advice for the extroverted majority, but we introverts would quickly spiral into doom. Or, to be even more simplistic in my analogies, saying that it's a good idea to always use your right hand to write, because studies show that it helps 90% of us to do so.

Scientists are publishing more and more studies on meditation each year. But many of these studies are beset by methodological flaws, leading to overhyped results. Davidson calls this “neuromythology.”

Yeah, we need to be really careful about that crap. It's like all those "quantum consciousness" bullshit books.

So, is the answer to the headline question still "no?" Well, you'll have to figure that out for yourself. Philosophy can guide science, and science can inform philosophy, but they're not the same sport. For me, I've spent too many years trying to figure out how to become more compassionate, but meditation just isn't my thing. I find it more practical to accept myself the way I am right now, flaws and all.

4 Like • Comment • View 1 comment

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