tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6866278136959676610.post2781318477122285065..comments2017-09-28T17:04:37.516-04:00Comments on Differently Sane: Why gravity is so weakMcChuckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10243337792601085456noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6866278136959676610.post-88310029740012043302017-09-28T17:04:37.516-04:002017-09-28T17:04:37.516-04:00The EM calculations use the complex numbers as a h...The EM calculations use the complex numbers as a handy shortcut for doing calculations. Basically, the real component is the X axis, the imaginary component is the Y axis, and the Z axis is time. It's just easier to run the numbers using complex numbers instead of trying to do vector/matrix math.<br /><br />I'm talking about things taking an actual imaginary component. For example, a particle falling past the event horizon of a black hole has it's speed increase beyond that of light. The extra velocity goes into the imaginary plane, as the real plane can't handle numbers like that. Objects can not surpass light speed - using real numbers. The theory says nothing about the complex plane. It's a loophole, albeit not a very useful one to us.<br /><br />I will admit this is one my more fanciful ideas, but I thought it was interesting that the numbers work out.McChuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10243337792601085456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6866278136959676610.post-55948614833932578312017-09-27T12:56:49.172-04:002017-09-27T12:56:49.172-04:00Hang on.. complex numbers.. isn't a good chunk...Hang on.. complex numbers.. isn't a good chunk of E-M there? At least in reactive circuits where there is a significant "imaginary" component to things. Or is that different somehow?elegantungulatehttps://elegantungulate.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com