[100097] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] mathematics terminology
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Felix Malmenbeck)
Wed Jan 7 17:25:55 2015
From: Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se>
To: Brad Wilson <bmacliam@aol.com>, "tlhingan-hol@kli.org"
<tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 22:25:28 +0000
In-Reply-To: <8D1F8D6F24DED11-1014-C846D@webmail-vm157.sysops.aol.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
An alternative way to describe real numbers might be =ABmI' motlh=BB ("norm=
al number"), reflecting the fact that they're the ones most people are fami=
liar with. Might be confused with "commonly used number" (like pi or tau or=
whatever they use), but I'm guessing the risk for confusion will be minima=
l, and it's somwthing real mathematicians are used to, anyway ("We measure =
thi using the Minkowski metric, which of course is not a metric.")
A complex number might be described as =ABmI' Qatlh=BB, because most people=
would regard them as complicated.
You might also call them =ABmI' le'=BB, referring to the fact that they're =
mostly used for highly specific purposes. It'd be a bit contradictory, sinc=
e the complex numbers are actually more general than real numbers. Still, t=
hat's language for you.
You might even imagine them being called =ABtej mI'=BB or =ABQeD mI'=BB, du=
e to their prominence in the sciences. Or even =AB'ul mI'=BB or =AB*chem* m=
I'=BB, assuming Klingons have found them useful for dealing with electricit=
y and electromagnetic fields, as we do.
I also kind of like the idea of referring to complex numbers as =ABDIngwI' =
mI'=BB or something like that, in reference to the fact that multiplicatio=
n with a complex number causes a rotation in the complex plane. Real number=
s might be called "flippers", because they can only point in two possibly d=
irections.
That being said, we might also wonder if Klingons would regard complex numb=
ers as numbers at all, or if they would regard them as couples of numbers.
________________________________________
From: Brad Wilson [bmacliam@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 22:20
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] mathematics terminology
>>> I used the terms {toghmeH mI'} and {juvmeH mI'}
These make perfect sense to me and would be understood by anyone with basic=
Klingon knowledge. Perhaps early Klingons only included whole (ie. countin=
g) numbers in the set of {toghmeH mI'}, but as their knowledge grew, they a=
dded the negative versions. Personally, I don't have a problem with {toghme=
H mI'} referring to any integer, positive or negative. As to "negative", I =
like {yoy}, but also consider {DoH} in that a negative number could be thou=
ght to be "backed away" from zero. Another concept might be that of "mirror=
ing" the positive number.
As for {juvmeH mI'}, things are rarely "measured" in integers, so using thi=
s for real numbers seems logical. Rational vs irrational numbers would be s=
ubsets of the real numbers. I like your idea of using "precision of measure=
ment" to differentiate these. I could see {mI' pup} used for rational numbe=
rs, ie. those that can be measured with precision.
If Klingon scientists recognize "imaginary" numbers as we do, ie. as multip=
les of the square root of -1, then perhaps a term like {mI' DuHbe'} or {mI'=
qItbe'} could be applied, since these numbers would clearly seem impossibl=
e in light of precision of measurement.
I really hope that Maltz, as a science officer, can shed some light on thes=
e technicalities. I haven't even begun to consider terms in my field - chem=
istry & chemical engineering.
gheyIl
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
