GYRAOL WARP

https://steamoss.com/id/TheMother♥♥♥♥inLegend/allcomments

hey, listen here ♥♥♥♥♥... ♥♥♥♥ you ♥♥♥♥♥...

These definitions of addition and multiplication turn the set of all complex numbers into a field, with (0, 0) and (1, 0) in the rate of 0 and 1. Proof: we simply verify the field axioms, as listed in definition 1.12. (Of course, we use the field structure of R.) Let X = (a, b), Y = (c, d), Z = (e, f). (A1) is clear.
(A2) X + Y = (a + c, b + d) = (c + a, d + b) = e + f.
(A3) (x + y) + z = (a + c, d + b) + (e, f) = (a + c + e, b + d + f) (a, h) + (c + e, d + f) x T (y t z).
(A4) X + 0 = (a, b) + (0, 0) = (a, b) = X.
(AS) Put -x = (-a, -b), Then x + (-x) = (0, 0) = 0.
(M1) is clear.
(M2) xy = (ac - bd, ad + be) = (ca - db, da + cb) = yx.
(M3) (xy)z (ac bd, ad + bc) (ef) = (ace - bde - adf - bcf + ade + bee) = (a, b) (ce - df, cf + de) = x(yz).
(M4) 1 x - (1, 0) (a, b) - (a, b) - X.
(M5) 1F x :1 = 0 Then (a, b) :1 = (0, 0).

I know this sounds bad, but hear me out.

Earlier this month, I was walking home from the store as usual. I began smelling a feint burning smell and I heard muffled shouting ahead. I picked up the pace to discover the commotion. A building was on fire and a small child was standing by the second story window shrieking for help as flames rose behind him. Luckily, I had been doing parkour ever since I was a teen so I climbed up to his window and reached out to grab the child. He reached out for me as well and I hoisted him down on my back. When we reached the ground the child ran to his parents and they thanked me while hugging him.

Later today I was visiting a friend in prison who happens to be serving a sentence for attempted murder of many children. He said I was an ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and I shouldn’t have saved the kid from the burning building. Ever since, I can’t help but feel like kind of an ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ so I would appreciate to hear a third persons perspective on this. So reddit, AITA?

These definitions of addition and multiplication turn the set of all complex numbers into a field, with (0, 0) and (1, 0) in the rate of 0 and 1. Proof: we simply verify the field axioms, as listed in definition 1.12. (Of course, we use the field structure of R.) Let X = (a, b), Y = (c, d), Z = (e, f). (A1) is clear.
(A2) X + Y = (a + c, b + d) = (c + a, d + b) = e + f.
(A3) (x + y) + z = (a + c, d + b) + (e, f) = (a + c + e, b + d + f) (a, h) + (c + e, d + f) x T (y t z).
(A4) X + 0 = (a, b) + (0, 0) = (a, b) = X.
(AS) Put -x = (-a, -b), Then x + (-x) = (0, 0) = 0.
(M1) is clear.
(M2) xy = (ac - bd, ad + be) = (ca - db, da + cb) = yx.
(M3) (xy)z (ac bd, ad + bc) (ef) = (ace - bde - adf - bcf + ade + bee) = (a, b) (ce - df, cf + de) = x(yz).
(M4) 1 x - (1, 0) (a, b) - (a, b) - X.
(M5) 1F x :1 = 0 Then (a, b) :1 = (0, 0).