On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:59 AM, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> If we call that new number tau (t). Then Euler's identity becomes: >>>> e^(t * i) = 1 >>>> >>> >>> >> There is no disputing matters of taste but I think the original >>> equation is more beautiful because it shows a relationship between 5 of the >>> most important numbers in all of mathematics. Your new equation only has 4 >>> important numbers, it doesn't include zero, it has the multiplicative >>> identity but not the additive identity. >>> >> >> > If you want to see all the constants at once there is an easy >> correction: e^(t*i) - 1 = 0 >> > > Then it has the additive identity but not the multiplicative identity and > I still prefer Euler's original. > > What is the mutliplicative identity in the original that is missing from this one? Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
