4 ms·
The video linked in this post will only make sense if you accept that x e^(theta i) and x k are respectively the rotation part and the scaling part of a linear
by E6300 10y ago
The video linked in this post will only make sense if you accept that x e^(theta i) and x k are respectively the rotation part and the scaling part of a linear transformation of x. I'm not aware of any other way to intuitively grasp an expression like e^(pi i).
- ouid 10y agothis is an old comment, but e^z (over C) can be defined as the analytic continuation of e^x (over R). This is a much more interesting definition, since it depends on the fact that that function is unique.