It's not anger. It's just an objection to treating complex numbers as somehow "special" or as "our jewel". You can iterate the Cayley-Dickson construction any

It's not anger. It's just an objection to treating complex numbers as somehow "special" or as "our jewel". You can iterate the Cayley-Dickson construction any number of times. Zero times gives you the reals, once gives you the complex numbers, twice gives you the octoneons, etc. Each time you gain closure under more operations but lose other properties (for example, the complex numbers aren't an ordered field). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cayley–Dickson_construction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cayley–Dickson_construction Complex numbers are just an arbitrarily-chosen point in a much larger space. If you find them useful, use them. Just don't try to claim that they are some kind of divine gift from the heavens.