Polar to Re/Im Unit Bug?

[Bob_Schor]

We agree!  As a friend of mine says, "Should be" isn't "is".  When you take a complex number with a unit associated with its "magnitude" (such as representing an AC signal as "Volts") and break it apart into its Real and Imaginary components, they should both have the unit associated with it, as they represent the projection of a "unit-ed quantity" on orthogonal axes, and when properly recombined, will again be in that "unit".  Polar to Complex passes along the unit to the complex quantity, and the inverse complex to Re-Im (properly) assigns it to both the Re and Im parts.  The "bug" is that "Polar to Re-Im" doesn't pass the Unit (carried only on the "r" component) to either "Re" or "Im" (it should, of course, be assigned to both.

Can we "agree to agree"?

Bob (Membership is up-to-date) Schor

[JÞB]

@Bob

Yes we agree.  You explanation confused me. 

The only really sticky point about the units thing is the hidden simplification in the unit circle equation Xunits^2 and Yunits^2 =1unit

That seams odd until we remember the Pathagoryias found out that x^2+y^2=z^2.  With z=1 and distribution of the exponent sqrt(z^2*Units^2)=1Unit