User talk:MFH/math

Hi. This is the subpage of my user talk which should contain everything concerning mathematics.

Counter-Examples

Starting a new subpage for collecting /counter-examples. I still believe that these are the best to understand the big "why". — MFH:Talk 01:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

about sequences...

(...) But then I noticed that you changed my ..."sequences" not indexed by... into ...a generalization of sequences... (a bit less rich in information, but well, I accept as it's "your" page, and I understand you don't like the "sequences" in quotation marks... ;-)

No, no, sequence is not my page. Here we have a community, and everything is done by talking and compromise. Please change it back if you like. Now that I know you actually meant it that way, I will not modify it again. 18:42, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"not your page": that's why I put quotes around "your"
concerning "sequences": I just regret that "a generalization" does not give any hint on what is generalized, while my original "subtitle" was more informative - although mathematically incorrect without saying that "sequences" in quotation marks means "not really sequences"... I just noticed that there is a page (redirection) for Family (mathematics) - maybe I should have used this xref (but this page is not so "perfectly" written...)

Again, all the world is yours. You can make any changes you please to sequence. If I really disagree about something, I will not change it, rather, ask about it on your talk page. Oleg Alexandrov 21:27, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Frechet filter

See (updated) Talk:Frechet filter. Oleg Alexandrov 02:11, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Merging norm (mathematics) and normed vector space again

You said on Talk:Metric (mathematics) that you liked my split from Metric space. It would be nice if you could have a look at Talk:Norm_(mathematics) and provide your opinion. MathMartin 20:57, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for catching my mistakes

Thanks for catching mistakes in my edits. Currently I am working on topological vector space articles and I appreciate any help and proofreading for my edits there.

I have noticed that your edits on sequence got reverted. I think your edits made the article clearer but you have to keep in mind this is an encyclopedia for the general public. The general consensus for math articles is

first paragraph should contain an introduction understandable for non math people
the definition should cover the most common cases (if possible). An abstract and clear definition (from a mathematical standpoint) can always be provided later.

MathMartin 18:50, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

remarkable

Visiting Cayley-Dickson construction, at the first glance, I believed I was drunk when I read "every nonzero element has a multiplicative inverse" and "... has divisors of zero". But of course this possible is due to lack of associativity. Now I'm rather astonished that this (counter-) example is (almost?) never mentioned when introducing "inverse elements"...

(Just pasting this here so I could run across it again when I'll have the time to check out if "inverse element" and related pages do not assume associativity...) — MFH: Talk 14:04, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]