Dazzling inexperienced students with magical identities and coincidences isn't teaching mathematics, it's teaching numerology. I really appreciated this article.
Dazzling inexperienced students with magical identities and coincidences isn't teaching mathematics, it's teaching numerology. I really appreciated this article.
On the other hand, to answer your demand: I define complex exponentiation by the formula e^(it) = -1 for all real, nonzero t.
Clearly stupid. Why? There are a lot of properties that one might naturally ask e^(it) to satisfy (for example, that e^(it) * e^(iu) = e^(i(t + u)), or that its derivative is ie^(it)), and the usual complex exponential satisfies all the right ones. So writing e^(i * pi) with no context has, I submit, at least some content.
However, I think there are certainly some areas of Math that are still pretty mysterious to the human intellect, no matter how advanced. The distribution of prime numbers and chaos come to mind.