I also find it disingenuous that he dismisses the square-root of negative one as "imaginary" (not real), but doesn't appear to have a problem with algebraic num

I also find it disingenuous that he dismisses the square-root of negative one as "imaginary" (not real), but doesn't appear to have a problem with algebraic numbers, negative numbers, or fractions (all of which are also extensions of the base ring). I'm trying to imagine how he'd feel about incomputable normal numbers...