User talk:Aleksander Stos: Difference between revisions
imported>Hendra I. Nurdin (o O) |
imported>Hendra I. Nurdin (CAC?) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:(In reply to your post on my talkpage) That's fine, Aleks, take your time -- there's a disclaimer up on top of the articles anyway :-). However, until the 0/0 issue is resolved, to be on the safe side my suggestion would be to temporarily remove the limit interpretation in little o big O O articles and leave it with the slightly abstract N-\epsilon formalism. Thanks. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 19:17, 10 October 2007 (CDT) | :(In reply to your post on my talkpage) That's fine, Aleks, take your time -- there's a disclaimer up on top of the articles anyway :-). However, until the 0/0 issue is resolved, to be on the safe side my suggestion would be to temporarily remove the limit interpretation in little o big O O articles and leave it with the slightly abstract N-\epsilon formalism. Thanks. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 19:17, 10 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
::Hi Aleks, I think it would be okay and probably a good idea to reintroduce the limit of fractions interpretation as long as the exceptions/pathological exceptions are explicitly mentioned in the article. So, please go ahead :-) Thanks. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 07:52, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | ::Hi Aleks, I think it would be okay and probably a good idea to reintroduce the limit of fractions interpretation as long as the exceptions/pathological exceptions are explicitly mentioned in the article. So, please go ahead :-) Thanks. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 07:52, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
==CAC?== | |||
Hi Aleks, I was wondering if you knew if somebody had volunteered to be a Core Arcticles Coordinator for the Mathematics Workgroup. If not, I was thinking if perhaps you may be interested in taking this role, since you're a professional mathematician you'd be just the right person for this. Thanks. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 15:21, 13 October 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 15:21, 13 October 2007
(please add your comments below)
Portuguese language
Hello, it's me (yet again). I made an info box for the above, went back to see, and noticed that you had already removed one such. Why was this? Is there some policy concerning them that I don't know? Anyway, my one is based on the Spanish language one & is not exactly a thing of beauty... Regards, Robert Thorpe 17:44, 5 October 2007 (CDT)
- Oh, I see. Well, I think I've combined the best of the 2 boxes. It's the Big Dirtyup! Robert Thorpe 08:34, 6 October 2007 (CDT)
Big O and little o
Hi Aleks, thanks for your tweaking of the little o and big O articles. You are right, separating the functions and sequences do make them more readable, I guess I was being a bit lazy :-( Just one little thing though, I intentionally avoided using the limit notation because of the pathological case where b_n and g(t) may be uniformly zero, so then it would be necessary to make conventions regarding the 0/0 quotient -- this needs to be remarked in the article. Do you know what would be a good way to get around this? I thought that with the N-epsilon argument this small complication is nicely removed (at the expense of being a bit more abstract). Also, I don't think there's much more that can possibly be added to the articles, so perhaps after adding some examples and some standard references they can be put forward for approval. Let me know what you think! Thanks. Hendra I. Nurdin 05:30, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
- (In reply to your post on my talkpage) That's fine, Aleks, take your time -- there's a disclaimer up on top of the articles anyway :-). However, until the 0/0 issue is resolved, to be on the safe side my suggestion would be to temporarily remove the limit interpretation in little o big O O articles and leave it with the slightly abstract N-\epsilon formalism. Thanks. Hendra I. Nurdin 19:17, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
- Hi Aleks, I think it would be okay and probably a good idea to reintroduce the limit of fractions interpretation as long as the exceptions/pathological exceptions are explicitly mentioned in the article. So, please go ahead :-) Thanks. Hendra I. Nurdin 07:52, 12 October 2007 (CDT)
CAC?
Hi Aleks, I was wondering if you knew if somebody had volunteered to be a Core Arcticles Coordinator for the Mathematics Workgroup. If not, I was thinking if perhaps you may be interested in taking this role, since you're a professional mathematician you'd be just the right person for this. Thanks. Hendra I. Nurdin 15:21, 13 October 2007 (CDT)