User talk:R.e.b./Archive 2
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 list of first order theories
- 2 Foundational status of arithmetic
- 3 impredicative
- 4 22/7 and all that
- 5 Lie Groups
- 6 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 7 Your article American Institute of Mathematics
- 8 AfD Nomination American Institute of Mathematics
- 9 Thanks for creating the article on Sethian
- 10 Which Chevalley?
- 11 TeX magic
- 12 Floating points on Pilot ACE
- 13 Piotr Blass
- 14 Exotic R4
- 15 PIOTR BLASS AGAIN
- 16 extension (mathematics)
- 17 THANK YOU
- 18 Reductive group
- 19 Well done
- 20 Thanks
- 21 Image requests
- 22 What is a simple Lie group?
- 23 Cleanup on C*-group algebra
- 24 q-series etc.
- 25 Fermat's last theorem
Hello. Given your interest in mathematical logic, maybe you can contribute not only to the article titled foundational status of arithmetic, but to the discussion about whether it is worth keeping. Michael Hardy 01:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
It does not look like an article I can contribute anything useful to, and I dont want to upset its author by giving my opinion of it. R.e.b. 15:19, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
OK -- I take it that means you probably largely agree with the comments. The author was a math professor some decades ago who had some respectable publications, but had what seems to me to be a somewhat weird obsession with this topic. Michael Hardy 22:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Have you noticed this stub article? Michael Hardy 23:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Looks like a reasonable stub. Why do you ask? (If you are hinting that I might expand it, the problem is that I have never managed to figure out exactly what the word means, though the definition given in the stub sounds about right.)R.e.b. 23:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I thought you might be able to contribute something to it since I thought I saw you mentioning or at least linking to that concept in one of your recent edits. Michael Hardy 02:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
22/7 and all that
Hello. Could you please vote at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Proof_that_22_over_7_exceeds_π?
Some people are actually saying any article devoted to a partiucalar mathematical proof is non-encyclopedic and should be deleted! Or that all articles primarily for mathematicians, that the general reader will not understand, should be deleted. Michael Hardy 17:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'd also like to invite you to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics which is where the mathematician congregate. --Salix alba (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
Your article American Institute of Mathematics
AfD Nomination American Institute of Mathematics
I've nominated the article American Institute of Mathematics for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that American Institute of Mathematics satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Institute of Mathematics. Don't forget to add four tildes (˜˜˜˜) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of American Institute of Mathematics during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. -- Masterpjz9 04:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- hyperbolic plane (the non-degenerate two-dimensional symmetric bilinear form with a norm 0 vector)
You're right; I should have paid more attention before linking to "hyperbolic plane". Michael Hardy 00:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for creating the article on Sethian
I just found that you created the article on James A. Sethian. I requested the article (along with one on Stanley Osher) back in October 2005. Nice to see it created. I've had the opportunity to hear both of them speak on level set methods. — ERcheck (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- I've never heard of Henry Chevalley, and I would guess that this is a copying error, but I dont know for sure. If you cant get hold of a copy of the book the quotation is from, then my suggestion is delete the first name and the link; that way the article is correct whatever the guy's first name is. R.e.b. 00:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I notice you removed the TeX magic string "\,\!" from a displayed formula at Wilkinson's polynomial, saying it caused display problems with your browser. Are you sure it wasn't a server transient? The only thing that magic incantation does is force PNG display, and it's used everywhere and recommended at Help:Formula. In the equation in question, the PNG happens anyway because of the fractions, but I'd like to be sure you don't go around removing this more broadly. The way TeX sees this, it should be completely harmless, because "\," is a thin space and "\!" is a negative thin space. Furthermore, because it forces a PNG the appearance of the formula should have nothing to do with your browser. --KSmrqT 03:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- I'm puzzled about what is going on. The formula displays correctly without the thin spaces, but just displays raw TeX with them. The next formula seems OK even with these thin spaces, just to make it more mysterious. Maybe there is some bizarre error elsewhere in the article which somehow causes this problem; I've noticed before that wikipedia errors can cause strange effects a long way away. R.e.b. 03:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- And now the problem seems to have vanished; everything displays fine. Another irreproducible sporadic bug. R.e.b. 03:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Floating points on Pilot ACE
Hi. What was your source for this edit to Wilkinson's polynomial, in which it is claimed that the mantissa of floating point numbers on the Pilot ACE is stored in 30 bits? I'm asking since it was subsequently changed to 24.
- See section on Pilot ACE precision on article talk page. R.e.b. 16:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
You can see that the AfD is an emotion-driven process. The article annoyed these children and that it why it will be deleted. I cleaned up the article so that you can see what a surviving article might have looked like. -- 18.104.22.168 04:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thanks could you send me the cleaned up article i cannot find it i tried resubmitting and was deleted within 5 minutes please send me e mail at firstname.lastname@example.org zariski lives! piotrek
thanks !!!!!!!!!!!! r e b you are a real geometer and a friend not a child! keep up your editing work on Zariski surfaces e mail me if you wish to get into research best piotrek blass www.pblass.com
could you help me construct my piotr blass page so that it will not be rejected by children? thanks in advance piotrek who are you? resume perhaps? shalom piotrek email@example.com
thanks r e b I shall take a look at characteristic two enriques surfaces
i may have to consult with my friends dolgacev,crew,cossec but we shall get this right i remember mumford's and zariski's inspiration on this topic it was fun with a bit of yelling back and forth
how can we control the red guards children who play with diamonds of knowledge with so little respect i grieve for the web sometimes but we shall overcome cyberspace is quite large! unfortunately i see the two party system invading wikipedia that is for another day shalom galois lives! best piotrek
Dear r e b I shall try to follow your advice although I am in the middle of campaigning and teaching and research as I am sur you understand.
Could you help me locate the admin who deleted my article so i can e mail him to put it back on my user page? The children play somehow I am reminded of William Goldings novel from the 1960's that I read in England.....Lord of the Flies Have you read it?
The disturbing thing is that grown ups seem to be using the children to do some unsavory stuff.... We shall overcome The web is too wonderful to be so misused. And yes our Ulam movement did pioneer a good chunk of the web although the children will not hear about it preferring to worship berners lee from afar.... he is apolitical and apparently convenient for the children and some others best piotrek ps what math do you do? pb galois lives!
Hi, I wrote some comments on the above article's talk page. Could you take a look? Orthografer 19:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- I expanded the article; I hope this answers your questions. R.e.b. 20:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- <:O) Orthografer 15:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
PIOTR BLASS AGAIN
YOU RESTORE MY FAITH IN THE HUMAN RACE COULD YOU HELP ME RESTORE MY WRITINGS ON ZARISKI SURFACES AND SHELTER THEM FROM THE MARINE BIOLOGIST'S WRATH THANKS YOUR FRIEND PIOTREK
I created extension (mathematics) as a new disambiguation page with more than 30 entries. I think it ought to get organized into sections and subsections. Probably you are better qualified than anyone here to help with at least some portions of this task. Michael Hardy 21:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- ...and now someone's started on this. Probably more could be done... Michael Hardy 22:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
God Bless you my friend You restore my faith in the mathematical community! and more! Feel free to contact me and to collaborate Enriques surfaces in char two coming soon shalom ve bracha shana tova ve hatima tova piotrek
Oh, you meant R, the abelian Lie algebra of real numbers. Sorry for the misunderstanding (and for "is" in place of "can be"). In any case, I think our combined efforts look pretty good. Oops, it seems Charles just improved it further as I was typing this. Michael Kinyon 18:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
In respect to your requests:
- Lakes of Wada - I don't even know how to start with this one. :( I could make infinite spherical reflections as examples for the basins, but I have no idea how to do the 2D diagram depicting the lakes. If you have an example around, please show me so I can give it a shot.
- Wilkinson's polynomial - can be done, although I don't have software for it as of yet. I'll file it on my current projects.
- I'd like to see that picture from the book, if possible. My original intent would be an animation, actually, and if I can find n good algorithm for the lakes that shouldn't be much of a problem.
- but this may not be worth the effort, as it's a rather obscure topic
- Oh, you forgot you're talking about the guy who made an animation about Villarceau circles ;) ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 21:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
What is a simple Lie group?
Cleanup on C*-group algebra
Great work on the math articles! It would be nice to have a better article on group C*-algebra that relates the dual of a LC group to that of its corresponding group C*-algebra, in particular to say something intelligent about weak containment which. I would help out, but I'm becoming increasingly frustrated with WP.--CSTAR 17:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Just saw your article mock theta function; thanks, good work! Please note also we have articles on q-series and basic hypergeometric series which this article overlaps a little bit, in terms of notation and definitions. linas 17:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
You changed the article Fermat's last theorem to say that Wiles' proof can be carried out in second-order arithmetic. Do you know of anyone who has been willing to put such a claim in print? At the time of the FOM discussion formerly referenced from the page, nobody there seemed to believe the proof goes through in SOA. I am not familiar with the proof myself, but I carefully read the FOM discussion before writing the former version of the paragraph on set theory in Wiles' proof. I put a fact tag on the paragraph and a note on the talk page looking for references. CMummert 00:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
No, and I doubt that there is such a claim in print, though I heard that Angus Macintyre has been thinking about this. However it is reasonably obvious to anyone who knows what l-adic cohomology is. If you are feeling nervous about verifiability feel free to tone down my statement a little (or even delete all references to set theory, which may be the best thing to do). However it is not a good idea to imply that there is any difficulty in formalizing the theorem in ZFC, and I do not recommend using an internet discussion by people who appear to know little about etale cohomology or number theory as a reliable source. R.e.b. 01:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)