This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Henri Poincaré article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why does the article state that Poincare′ was "Indian"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.166.105.91 ( talk) 18:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
"Einstein's paper was remarkable in that it contained no references at all."
Given the context, that could mean...
a. Einstein did not acknowledge the published work of any other person.
b. Einstein's method did not require a reference clock.
Is it one, the other, or both?
97.104.76.107 ( talk) 04:40, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
"For details, see…" Why not describe the serious error in the article? I'm told this caused the invention of chaos theory. John Moser ( talk) 03:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
The English pron. (from what I hear on TV etc.) appears to be /pwɛŋkɑːreɪ/ (stress differing in UK and US), but I can't find a source. The OED, Lexico, Random House / dict.com, AHD and Merriam Webster all screw it up one way or another (e.g. recording contradicts transcription, or don't give an English pron. at all). — kwami ( talk) 03:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The source of Poincare claiming that Set Theory is a disease is Dauben 1979, which isn't given a title. I've read Dauben's 2005 paper "The Battle for Cantorian Set Theory" in which the claim is repeated, and in that paper the source for this is the last section of Poincare's "L’avenir des Mathématiques", but the quote isn't there. Can anyone else find a place where Poincare called Set theory a disease? Nullseth ( talk) 00:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Henri Poincaré article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why does the article state that Poincare′ was "Indian"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.166.105.91 ( talk) 18:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
"Einstein's paper was remarkable in that it contained no references at all."
Given the context, that could mean...
a. Einstein did not acknowledge the published work of any other person.
b. Einstein's method did not require a reference clock.
Is it one, the other, or both?
97.104.76.107 ( talk) 04:40, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
"For details, see…" Why not describe the serious error in the article? I'm told this caused the invention of chaos theory. John Moser ( talk) 03:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
The English pron. (from what I hear on TV etc.) appears to be /pwɛŋkɑːreɪ/ (stress differing in UK and US), but I can't find a source. The OED, Lexico, Random House / dict.com, AHD and Merriam Webster all screw it up one way or another (e.g. recording contradicts transcription, or don't give an English pron. at all). — kwami ( talk) 03:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The source of Poincare claiming that Set Theory is a disease is Dauben 1979, which isn't given a title. I've read Dauben's 2005 paper "The Battle for Cantorian Set Theory" in which the claim is repeated, and in that paper the source for this is the last section of Poincare's "L’avenir des Mathématiques", but the quote isn't there. Can anyone else find a place where Poincare called Set theory a disease? Nullseth ( talk) 00:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)