On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:59 AM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> 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
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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.