Talk:Twin prime conjecture: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
NPOV math definitions |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
---- |
---- |
||
Yes I see. But this is, I guess, just you opinion. I think we should a little bit think of the future. I am shure that in some 2 or 4 years an article for [[Twin Prime Conjecture|twin prime conjecture]] would be extend in, let us say, some great amount. And I have already used a reference for '''twin prime constant''' in the article for '''Brun's constant <i>B</i>''' and now it is lost because you had deleted it. And futhermore if someone will look for '''twin prime constant''' in very extended and 'huge' near-future article [[Twin Prime Conjecture|Hardest extended twin prime conjecture]] he would have to work one's way through it. It is a very thin line between encyclopedias, dictionaries and thick books. I hope we all understand each other.<br> |
Yes I see. But this is, I guess, just you opinion. I think we should a little bit think of the future. I am shure that in some 2 or 4 years an article for [[Twin Prime Conjecture|twin prime conjecture]] would be extend in, let us say, some great amount. And I have already used a reference for '''twin prime constant''' in the article for '''Brun's constant <i>B</i>''' and now it is lost because you had deleted it. And futhermore if someone will look for '''twin prime constant''' in very extended and 'huge' near-future article [[Twin Prime Conjecture|Hardest extended twin prime conjecture]] he would have to work one's way through it. It is a very thin line between encyclopedias, dictionaries and thick books. I hope we all understand each other. <br> |
||
[[user:XJamRastafire|XJamRastafire]] [2002.02.25] 1 Monday |
[[user:XJamRastafire|XJamRastafire]] [2002.02.25] 1 Monday |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
::It is true that I often initially modify or remove additions of yours, because I think they are unclear or for other reasons. But in the end, many Wikipedia math articles have been getting a lot better because of your involvement. [[user:AxelBoldt|AxelBoldt]] |
::It is true that I often initially modify or remove additions of yours, because I think they are unclear or for other reasons. But in the end, many Wikipedia math articles have been getting a lot better because of your involvement. [[user:AxelBoldt|AxelBoldt]] |
||
:::Yes OK. I am glad then if I can do some improvements on articles. But concerning rigorous definitions I've noticed too that you put out off some article external links as (('''Good introductory article on Brun's constant at: ''' http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Primes/twin.html )) I quite understand that article but if you have problems understanding it, I guess it's your problem. You should ask that writer in what way ''p'' in the limit is defined. I don't agree that a series and a constant are the same thing... I do prefer if you first ask what you don't understand and what you think is not right and after that I shall try to fix it up. And thanks for above encouragement anyway. -- [[user:XJamRastafire|XJam]] [2002.04.02] 2 Tuesday (2nd ed) |
|||
Revision as of 09:52, 2 April 2002
Axel - you've done it again. It is fine to extend articles but please don't cut them. How many See also should be in one article? I guess you chase me to pull mine tail, ha, ha.
XJamRastafire
Well, there's no hard rule how many see also's you need. I thought that we probably won't have separate articles for "twin prime constant" and "Hardy-Littlewood conjecture", since those two topics are now well covered in this article. On the other hand, if we decide to have a separate "Hardy-Littlewood conjecture" article (which might be a good idea), then much of the material now in "Twin Prime Conjecture" should be moved there. AxelBoldt
Yes I see. But this is, I guess, just you opinion. I think we should a little bit think of the future. I am shure that in some 2 or 4 years an article for twin prime conjecture would be extend in, let us say, some great amount. And I have already used a reference for twin prime constant in the article for Brun's constant B and now it is lost because you had deleted it. And futhermore if someone will look for twin prime constant in very extended and 'huge' near-future article Hardest extended twin prime conjecture he would have to work one's way through it. It is a very thin line between encyclopedias, dictionaries and thick books. I hope we all understand each other.
XJamRastafire [2002.02.25] 1 Monday
Axel can you please explain why we don't use a term of logarithmic integral Li(n) and the function Li2(n)? Are you inventing a new kind of math, perhaps?
XJam [2002.04.02] 2 Tuesday (0)
In the article, we didn't use the function Li2(x) anywhere but in the one formula, so there was no need to introduce the notation. There is no point in introducing a notation if you're not going to use it; it just confuses the reader. AxelBoldt
- Hey man, I don't want to confuse a reader. I just want to give him futher information. It is nice to see that logarithmic integral shows itself in many equations for the density of primes. I am not shure what a term NPOV really means? I give constructive annotations and you obviously deny all of them. I hope I'll still have enough will to continue my work here in Wikipedia. -- XJam [2002.04.02] 2 Tuesday (1st ed)
- It is true that I often initially modify or remove additions of yours, because I think they are unclear or for other reasons. But in the end, many Wikipedia math articles have been getting a lot better because of your involvement. AxelBoldt
- Yes OK. I am glad then if I can do some improvements on articles. But concerning rigorous definitions I've noticed too that you put out off some article external links as ((Good introductory article on Brun's constant at: http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Primes/twin.html )) I quite understand that article but if you have problems understanding it, I guess it's your problem. You should ask that writer in what way p in the limit is defined. I don't agree that a series and a constant are the same thing... I do prefer if you first ask what you don't understand and what you think is not right and after that I shall try to fix it up. And thanks for above encouragement anyway. -- XJam [2002.04.02] 2 Tuesday (2nd ed)