User talk:Army1987

[untitled]

Don't delete large chunks of text out of articles without discussion as to why. Rick K 21:20, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Empty product

Hello. Your addition to the end of a paragraph in empty product flatly contradicts what is stated earlier in the paragraph. If your edit is to make any sense, you would need to change those earlier parts of the paragraph as well. Howevers, you raise an issue that should perhaps be addressed. Could you bring it up on the discussion page? Michael Hardy 23:28, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I once read somewhere that 0⁰ is indeterminate, because 0⁰ = 0^1-1 = 0¹/0¹ = 0/0 which is indeterminate.

And the proof that n⁰ = 1 to which I'm most familiar is n⁰ = n^1-1 = n¹/n¹ = n/n = 1 which of course doesn't apply if n = 0. --Army1987 11:26, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The sense in which 0⁰ is indeterminate is that if f(x) and g(x) both approach 0 as x approaches something then f(x)^g(x) may approach any positive number, depending on what functions f and g are. But for many purposes, including both formal power series and convergent power series, and many of the purposes of combinatorics and probability, one should take 0⁰ to be 1. Michael Hardy 19:17, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Guitar

I deleted the stuff about coins as picks and Bryan May from the intro for guitar because it doesn't really belong there. If you can add it (and as much more information as you know) to the article on guitar picks that'd be great though --KayEss 16:10, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Planck units

i am deleting the note regarding musical scale and the Planck angular frequency. it's a little cute, but i don't think it's of interest to those reading the article seriously. one could make similar notes for every other Planck unit and all that would do is clutter the article.

Uses of trigonometry

As for the "number theory" section: Well, but in order to know which fractions are in lowest terms I have to already know the factorisation of 42, then I can evalue the Moebius function simplily using the definition. Therefore that formula is pretty useless.

Earlier I answered thus:

I find the word therefore above to be a gross non-sequitur. Michael Hardy 21:59, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Now I have more time, so I will elaborate. Obviously you can evaluate (I assume you meant "evaluate") the Moebius function without using trigonometric functions. When I wrote that section, I certainly did not have in mind using trigonometric functions to evaluate the Moebius function. What I had in mind was using the connection between the Moebius function and trigonometric functions in order to apply Fourier analysis to number theory. Michael Hardy 23:21, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I understand this, but the wording could be misunderstood as implying that a primality test can be made using trigonometric functions and used in cryptanalysis to crack public key crypto, or something like that. Surely it's not what it's meant. --Army1987 11:47, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I would help to sign your comments. That way one could know without looking at the edit history that the person who wrote your comment quoted above was not the same person who wrote the paragraph that followed it. Michael Hardy 23:21, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, next times I'll have to remember to sign my comments... :---Army1987 11:47, 1 May 2005 (UTC))[reply]

OK, I've added some comments to the article to clarify the point that you missed. Michael Hardy 23:38, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quark

Your edit summary to Quark [1] is puzzling, as the denominators for charges were clearly 3 before. Were you having difficulty reading them? Susvolans (pigs can fly) 10:23, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my browser showed them as 2's. In general, IMO one-character vulgar fractions are better avoided.

Just out of interest, what is your browser and operating system? Susvolans (pigs can fly) 12:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IE 6.0 WinXP. Now I looked at that version again, and discovered that they were 2's only in Medium and Very Small font sizes. In Very Large, Large and Small they are 3's. I understand that very small could be too small to clearly show the 3's, but I wonder why Small shows 3's and Medium shows 2's... there must be a bug in the font, I guess.

E flat? Sure, why not.

If you have the data to evaluate out-of-tuneness of harmonics relative to equal temperament in the harmonic series article, by all means edit away. I rewrote most of the surrounding text but left the list and graphic "as is". My experience as a piano technician tells me they're ALL out of tune to some extent in the physical world, and that even equal temperament itself can't be specified as an unchanging set of frequencies any more than it can be tuned with an unchanging set of beat rates. Veg0matic 03:58, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

see Talk:harmonic series (music)

CFerror

Done, thanks. R adiant _>|< 14:11, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

sorry, i thought ordinary mathematics was basic mathematics

Category:Millennial Wikipedians

Category:Millennial Wikipedians has been listed on categories for deletion. Since you are using it on your user page please weigh in on the vote and that of the other generational categories here. Thanks. -JCarriker 19:58, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Riemann zet pictures

Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to create the reimann zeta pictures, ... but ... in my browser, they look terrible; they're fading into white. I think its the image resizing, its cutting out pixels. Would it be possible to have you redraw the pictures with a heavier line weight, so that when they get resized small, they still have impact?

Also, could you make a picture of Re zeta vs. Im zeta? I find that picture quite dramatic, as it spirals around, with all of the spirals going through zero. Anyway, thanks. linas 01:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. I've made it with a shareware program whose trial period expired right yesterday... (Honest!) However I can try editing the current one with Paint Shop Pro, but no promise that I'd manage to create something decent...

Done.--Army1987 09:53, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2. I wouldn't even know how to. Howewer I saw one on http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunction.html, but I don't know its copyright status.--Army1987 09:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

F*** it...

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/about/faq.html#copyright--Army1987 09:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Italy or UK?

Why are you listed on Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Italy but categorized as from UK?--Army1987 10:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, because I was born in and grew up in Italy, yet happen now to be living in the UK. Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Italy is meant to include wikipedians originally from Italy. Category:UK Wikipedians is a little bit greyer, but I guess it is being replaced by Category:Wikipedians in the United Kingdom, which I would count as. Though only for another two weeks, after which I guess I'll have to change it.

If you're question is to work out whether I ought to be in Category:Wikipedians in Italy, well I don't know. The page says "...or are associated with Italy", so I'd say yes. If the categorizers want to be strict and include only those who are currently living in Italy, well I guess no. I doesn't really matter to me. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 10:57, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then I suggest you to include yourself in both categories (and remove yourself from the list).--Army1987 17:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

System of a Down edits

Hi Army1987. I've discussed this issue at length as Pasboudin and also as 66.36.x.x when I was unregistered. The same issue has been debated at Talk:System of a Down and Talk:Mezmerize, so you may wish to check the discussions on these pages for background. Talk:System_of_a_Down#Album_mixup_rumor is a particularly good discussion. Pasboudin 21:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't dare to touch that paragraph anymore. Let's see the results of the votes. IMHO, we'd better keep the paragraph in its Rhobite version, or maybe even better in its Norvy version, until Hypnotize is released, then use the what-will-we-expect-to-read-in-year-2015 rule of thumb. --Army1987 12:23, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Since you don't think the Mike version should be there any more, maybe consider a vote change? Pasboudin 21:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If by "Mike version" you mean that prolix ungrammatical crap, well, I've never thought it should be there. The version in the text of the poll is the one Rhobite wrote in spite of protection. My vote is for that, but I would also consider Norvy version. In addition to that, I provided "improved" (IMVHO) versions of Norvy and Rhobite versions.--Army1987 21:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Er... The matter is about what is meant by "majorly rewrite", I changed my mind.--Army1987 21:14, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look at all those languages!

That's a lot of languages, how did you learn all of those?!!! I'll wait for you to come back, though.

Kinneyboy90 01:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As for English, I've been studying it for ~10 years, I used to play lots of computer games in English, to use (and still use) some computer programs in English, I listen lots of music in English, surf websites in English etc... so I'm quite fluent in it. (Last year I scored 4 out of 5 at the end of an English course in Oxford, and this year I think I'm gonna take the FCE exam.)

I used to study French at school (since September 1998 to June 2001), but I'm no longer fluent in it. Anyway I still understand it well enough to use an article as a source for writings in one's own language and to ask or answer simple questions as WikiBabel says (and I manage to understand something in French TV news). I picked up a little Spanish by playing Spanish Pokémon Red (no, I'm not joking) — however Spanish is very similar to Italian. Once you can speak Italian, French and Latin it's no problem to learn to understand Spanish at least at a basic level.

As for Europanto, that's not a "serious" language, I used it before even knowing it had a name (and, yes, I've had conversations in Europanto too, though only with Italian speakers).

I study Latin at school. However, in Italy they just teach you to translate texts from Latin to Italian using a dictionary, usually at a speed of ten lines of text an hour or less; I would not be able to directly write in Latin, or would be able with some difficulty, so I decided to downgrade myself from la-2 to la-1.

I have also some basic knowledge of Japanese and German (i.e. counting, greeting, saying simple sentences...) but I'm unable to read encyclopedic articles in these languages, so I left them out. --Army1987 13:25, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zamnedix

Lol thanks, dude. I realize that now. --Ukiki 00:17, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]