>>12424046In physics, you see those concepts e.g. in field theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassmann_numberor general more wilder representations of symmetry groups (and half-integer spin fields).
But it's also a representation of a special case of a quotient of a polynomial ring and common in algebraic geometry, when more differential geometry-like properties want to be modeled.
I skimmed through the Wildberger video and I'm super surprised he talks positively of Robinson's non-standard analysis. Not because I dislike it, but - as he points out - it's not much less "problematic" than the reals. Seems he just want to be a contrarian. Non-standard analysis periodically has its comeback and it's logic formulation is, I think, over considered to be too complicated (given people are already used to standard foundations for math).
So I know what we'll see now - him working out how to phrase general theorems of the theory in its linear representation (and his two "colored complex units"). I'm find with this, but his non-formalist othodoxy is tiresome and I call into question his self-proclaimed rogue status
