tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed ("What makes complex analysis special?") 2018-11-04T13:55:05-08:00 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla & Feed Publisher Scott Carnahan comments on ""What makes complex analysis special?"" (18046) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1276/what-makes-complex-analysis-special/?Focus=18046#Comment_18046 2012-01-14T19:58:26-08:00 2018-11-04T13:55:05-08:00 Scott Carnahan http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/73/ As you can see, I pointed it to a page that was identical to the first question. Unfortunately, this doesn't cover the second, "why not quaternions" question. As you can see, I pointed it to a page that was identical to the first question. Unfortunately, this doesn't cover the second, "why not quaternions" question.

]]> Yemon Choi comments on ""What makes complex analysis special?"" (18034) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1276/what-makes-complex-analysis-special/?Focus=18034#Comment_18034 2012-01-13T23:52:04-08:00 2018-11-04T13:55:05-08:00 Yemon Choi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/81/ This question currently has three votes to close. While it seems rather vague and "stone-soupy", I seem to remember hearing that there is something to be said in this direction, via ... This question currently has three votes to close. While it seems rather vague and "stone-soupy", I seem to remember hearing that there is something to be said in this direction, via Clifford algebras and higher-dimensional versions of Cauchy-Riemann.

So for me, this doesn't automatically fall into the class of questions which do not admit good answers, although I admit that as phrased it could easily invite a bunch of not very good ones...

]]>