I recently created a draft for German mathematician Jörg M. Wills. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley ( talk) 03:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The most remarkable formula in mathematics and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7#The most remarkable formula in mathematics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. By the way, I don't know the format for adding RfD to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mathematics. Sorry … SilverMatsu ( talk) 09:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Could somebody with rollback rights revert the edits made to Nikolai Lobachevsky by Truthtellinggoat ( talk · contribs)? (plain vandalism, but spread around enough that it's best not to undo by hand). jraimbau ( talk) 05:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
There is an ITN RD nomination regarding the recent death of Aleksei Parshin which has not seen much input, perhaps due to the technical nature of some of the article content. The nomination may be of interest to this WikiProject, so your additional input is appreciated. Thanks. — MarkH21 talk 08:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't think Euler's formula are also known as Euler-alpha equations. So I think it needs to be retargeted, but I don't know the target. -- SilverMatsu ( talk) 04:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
The Sine and cosine article is now fully protected because I and MrOllie can't reach an agreement. It concerns an inclusion of this article [1]. This [2] is the difference between the version proposed by MrOllie and the version proposed by me. Please help us to resolve this dispute on the relevant Talk page [3]. A1E6 ( talk) 14:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Complex exponential and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 23#Complex exponential until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. SilverMatsu ( talk) 03:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I've been trying to beat back a very stubborn and very promotional editor on Malfatti circles who insists that all previous papers claiming a certain theorem are somehow unsatisfactory, that all later papers referring to those previous papers as being rigorous solutions are incorrect, that only a brand-new publication from 2022 (presumably, by the editor in question) counts as a valid solution, that their own edits to other-language Wikipedias count as evidence for these assertions, and that more than merely citing this new publication among others claiming solutions we must proclaim it to be the only true solution in the text of the article. Assistance here would be welcome. — David Eppstein ( talk) 17:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
The article Geometric algebra is about the same object as the one covered in the article Clifford algebra, but presented using different notation and perspective. Should the two article be merged according to WP:OVERLAP? Should Geometric algebra be turned into something more clearly separate in scope like Geometric models of Clifford algebras?
Both article are quite long, but it looks like unnecessary material from both current articles can be easily cut to form a single well-written article from a quick glance. — MarkH21 talk 09:46, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
fun introduction. An encyclopedic article can cover multiple perspectives in different sections. Also, re
spent half its time talking about unrelated geometric algebra constructions before completely shifting the language, sections can be definitely self-contained and introduce new notation; this is quite normal in my experience (as long as it is made clear that there is a shift and a brief indication of why there is a shift). — MarkH21 talk 05:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
17:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)In mathematics, a geometric algebra (GA) is another name for a Clifford algebra Cl(V, g) of a vector space V with a quadratic form g over a field of scalars F. It is an algebra over F generated by the vector space V....The first few sentences here should have no mention of quadratic forms or fields (and the whole article should focus primarily if not exclusively on “real” scalars), and does not need letters or symbols. Vector division should probably be mentioned somewhere near the top. It might instead say something along the lines of “In mathematics, geometric algebra (also known as real Clifford algebra) is an extension of elementary algebra to work with geometrical objects such as vectors. Geometric algebra is built out of two fundamental operations, addition and and the geometric product. Multiplication of vectors results in higher-dimensional objects called multivectors. Compared to other formalisms for manipulating geometric objects, geometric algebra is noteworthy for supporting vector division and addition of objects of different dimensions....” The rest of the lede section that I didn’t quote here is way too long and link-heavy (most of it can be transplanted to later sections or removed), and the early sections of the article are too jargony, technical, and unfocused. – jacobolus (t) 00:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
A fresh perspective: a Clifford algebra is a mathematical structure, and abstract mathematicians seem to know exactly what they mean by the term. Keeping aside for the moment "geometric algebra", nominally the study of "geometric algebras", it seems to me that those that use the term "a geometric algebra" usually think they are talking about a structure, namely a Clifford algebra (usually over the field of real numbers). They do not appear to realize that they really seem to mean the use of a Clifford algebra as a representation of a geometry with its properties – that is, the correspondence of features of an algebra to model aspects of a geometry. For example, by a CGA is meant a specific mapping between elements of a Clifford algebra and points, circles, etc., and the transformations of a conformal geometry. As such, the subject area "geometric algebra" is the study of such correspondences and their application, which one could regard as belonging to applied mathematics. Given this perspective (which I do not claim to be able to source), the most valuable article Geometric algebra that we could have would deal with the application of Clifford algebras to express geometric problems (for which vector algebra, Pauli algebra, Dirac algebra, etc., are also used). An introduction of geometric algebra that addresses vector algebra problems alone would be very helpful to the lay reader – which is something that would not belong in Clifford algebra. With the intuition of bivectors (oriented areas) to replace pseudovectors, etc., this article could act as a reference for people who want to find out about what geometric algebras are good for. I agree with jacobolus that the current lead totally misses the right approach, however one looks at it. 172.82.46.195 ( talk) 00:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
I recently created a draft for German mathematician Jörg M. Wills. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley ( talk) 03:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The most remarkable formula in mathematics and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7#The most remarkable formula in mathematics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. By the way, I don't know the format for adding RfD to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mathematics. Sorry … SilverMatsu ( talk) 09:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Could somebody with rollback rights revert the edits made to Nikolai Lobachevsky by Truthtellinggoat ( talk · contribs)? (plain vandalism, but spread around enough that it's best not to undo by hand). jraimbau ( talk) 05:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
There is an ITN RD nomination regarding the recent death of Aleksei Parshin which has not seen much input, perhaps due to the technical nature of some of the article content. The nomination may be of interest to this WikiProject, so your additional input is appreciated. Thanks. — MarkH21 talk 08:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't think Euler's formula are also known as Euler-alpha equations. So I think it needs to be retargeted, but I don't know the target. -- SilverMatsu ( talk) 04:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
The Sine and cosine article is now fully protected because I and MrOllie can't reach an agreement. It concerns an inclusion of this article [1]. This [2] is the difference between the version proposed by MrOllie and the version proposed by me. Please help us to resolve this dispute on the relevant Talk page [3]. A1E6 ( talk) 14:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Complex exponential and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 23#Complex exponential until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. SilverMatsu ( talk) 03:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I've been trying to beat back a very stubborn and very promotional editor on Malfatti circles who insists that all previous papers claiming a certain theorem are somehow unsatisfactory, that all later papers referring to those previous papers as being rigorous solutions are incorrect, that only a brand-new publication from 2022 (presumably, by the editor in question) counts as a valid solution, that their own edits to other-language Wikipedias count as evidence for these assertions, and that more than merely citing this new publication among others claiming solutions we must proclaim it to be the only true solution in the text of the article. Assistance here would be welcome. — David Eppstein ( talk) 17:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
The article Geometric algebra is about the same object as the one covered in the article Clifford algebra, but presented using different notation and perspective. Should the two article be merged according to WP:OVERLAP? Should Geometric algebra be turned into something more clearly separate in scope like Geometric models of Clifford algebras?
Both article are quite long, but it looks like unnecessary material from both current articles can be easily cut to form a single well-written article from a quick glance. — MarkH21 talk 09:46, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
fun introduction. An encyclopedic article can cover multiple perspectives in different sections. Also, re
spent half its time talking about unrelated geometric algebra constructions before completely shifting the language, sections can be definitely self-contained and introduce new notation; this is quite normal in my experience (as long as it is made clear that there is a shift and a brief indication of why there is a shift). — MarkH21 talk 05:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
17:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)In mathematics, a geometric algebra (GA) is another name for a Clifford algebra Cl(V, g) of a vector space V with a quadratic form g over a field of scalars F. It is an algebra over F generated by the vector space V....The first few sentences here should have no mention of quadratic forms or fields (and the whole article should focus primarily if not exclusively on “real” scalars), and does not need letters or symbols. Vector division should probably be mentioned somewhere near the top. It might instead say something along the lines of “In mathematics, geometric algebra (also known as real Clifford algebra) is an extension of elementary algebra to work with geometrical objects such as vectors. Geometric algebra is built out of two fundamental operations, addition and and the geometric product. Multiplication of vectors results in higher-dimensional objects called multivectors. Compared to other formalisms for manipulating geometric objects, geometric algebra is noteworthy for supporting vector division and addition of objects of different dimensions....” The rest of the lede section that I didn’t quote here is way too long and link-heavy (most of it can be transplanted to later sections or removed), and the early sections of the article are too jargony, technical, and unfocused. – jacobolus (t) 00:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
A fresh perspective: a Clifford algebra is a mathematical structure, and abstract mathematicians seem to know exactly what they mean by the term. Keeping aside for the moment "geometric algebra", nominally the study of "geometric algebras", it seems to me that those that use the term "a geometric algebra" usually think they are talking about a structure, namely a Clifford algebra (usually over the field of real numbers). They do not appear to realize that they really seem to mean the use of a Clifford algebra as a representation of a geometry with its properties – that is, the correspondence of features of an algebra to model aspects of a geometry. For example, by a CGA is meant a specific mapping between elements of a Clifford algebra and points, circles, etc., and the transformations of a conformal geometry. As such, the subject area "geometric algebra" is the study of such correspondences and their application, which one could regard as belonging to applied mathematics. Given this perspective (which I do not claim to be able to source), the most valuable article Geometric algebra that we could have would deal with the application of Clifford algebras to express geometric problems (for which vector algebra, Pauli algebra, Dirac algebra, etc., are also used). An introduction of geometric algebra that addresses vector algebra problems alone would be very helpful to the lay reader – which is something that would not belong in Clifford algebra. With the intuition of bivectors (oriented areas) to replace pseudovectors, etc., this article could act as a reference for people who want to find out about what geometric algebras are good for. I agree with jacobolus that the current lead totally misses the right approach, however one looks at it. 172.82.46.195 ( talk) 00:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)