This is a very good point, but it took me a minute to get what you were saying beneath the snark. Translating without the snark: There's a famous equation rela

This is a very good point, but it took me a minute to get what you were saying beneath the snark. Translating without the snark: There's a famous equation relating sin and cos to complex exponentiation. It also helps explain the Taylor expansions of sin and cos, which is one way to compute them and to find properties about them. It's a very important equation. It is: ix e = cos x + i sin x kazinator's point was that this equation relies on cos and sin taking radians as arguments. If they take turns instead, then you need to insert messy extra constants to state this equation! jVinc's counter-point, made with lots of snark, is that there's an equation that's even nicer if you just instead measure angles in turns with ncos and nsin: (-1)^(2x) = ncos(x) + i nsin(x) It's similar, but doesn't require the magic constant e. A proof sketch that these are equivalent: (-1)^(2x) = e^ln((-1)^(2x)) = -e^(2x) = e^(i * (2 pi x)) using e^(pi i) = -1