![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi Jitse,
Just wondering....in your opinion, do you think that the factorialplex function could compactify the space of zeros of the Riemann-Zeta function?
thanks, trvce
ps - its alright to delete the article if you want.
I have replaced much of Fisher's equation. The previous contents seems to be taken from EqWorld which has nice references but wrong math. Please check original literature (not websites) in case you consider rv. Thanks. Also, maybe it should be merged with reaction-diffusion equations, which looks a bit sad. Jmath666 08:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there is more than one traveling wave, moreover the formula made no sense - surely the wave speed does not depend on a. For all I known it might have been the correct formula but context messed up by the author from Eqworld; I'll need to look up the references they cite when I have time. Kolmogorov et al have detailed analysis and it is also outlined in Grindrod. Fisher (1930) was cited by Kolmogorov et al but I do not have it. Do you have a copy of Fisher (1937)? Reaction-diffusion equation looks much better now, very nice context. It needs some meat (=math). If you want to move the 2nd half from Fisher's equation there go ahead. I am reading up on reaction-diffusion equations now from Grindrod in a hurry because I put that on someone's exam. I may end up writing some notes on the phase-plane method in LaTeX for my own use that could be wikified automatically. Jmath666 16:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Here we go. From the abstract of the Ablowitz citation:
So this was not a general formula by any means but a parenthetical info. To put it back we'd need to get that paper and make sure it is quoted right but is it worth the bother? I have asked Mark for a copy out of curiosity anyway. Jmath666 16:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I'll see about adding the closed-form solution back when I get the paper. It is nice to have closed form in a special case. I wonder if there are really multiple waves, one for each C but not enough to test it myself. I have read the KPP paper hoping to learn the technique and I it is indeed a mess. Can you please add the Fisher (1937) citation? Jmath666 17:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll see if I can put my hands on the Fisher (1930) book to verify the citation. Mark Ablowitz said he was sending me the paper so I should have it soon. Jmath666 18:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Got the paper. Please look again now. Jmath666 23:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jitse,
I have added some pubs with random algorithms about approximating matrix multiplication. I want in the future to add a section about those algorithms. You can delete them or move them in discussion, until then. (I am working with these algorithms for my diploma thesis, so I think that I could contribute in this article.) Zmoboros 18:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Top Editor's Award Star Recipient | |
To Jitse Niesen, for his long time positive contribution to the Srebrenica massacre article from User Mozart Amadeus Wolfgang . ( talk) Congratulations! |
U "hid" the dubious tag on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/Disputes. There is a genuine dispute as to whether the statement is time appropriate. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/Disputes this is the appropriate in line tag.
Can u explain to me what u did and why or point me to an article. Tom94022 05:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for putting the citation to my PhD thesis back on the Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet page. I'm trying to add a link to that page from the one about the Morlet wavelet, stating that the Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet has better properties for time-frequency analysis (it supercedes the Morlet wavelet). Sadly, it has been deleted by a trio of anonymous spam fighters. I wonder if you would be so kind as to help out. The content is in the history... Jon Harrop 22:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you OK? Hope you are in good health. Have not heard from you in a while. Mike
Thank you for your inquiry. The T-Integrator has the form
Xn = Xn-1+G*T(L*XDn+(1-L)*XDn-1). When G =1 and L = 3/2 the T-Integrator takes the form Xn = Xn-1+ .5*T(3*XDn-XDn-1). This is the Adams integrator much used for real time simulation for many years.
From the T-Integrator point of view, this integrator works well for explicite real-time applications because a lead of 3/2T accounts for a half sample period delay from integrand reconstruction and a full sample period delay when it is used in feedback loops (most linear real-time applications). If the integrator is use implicitly (some nonlinear real-time applicatioins), further tuning is usually required.
For reference, please read my book entitled "Mathematical Modeling and Digital Simulation for Engineers and Scientists, 2nd Edition"... John Wiley and Sons Pub.:Chapter on T-Integration. 1988.
Also, see http://members.aol.com/jsmith46ws/ni1.htm.
I hope this is helpful. Let me know.
Jon Michael Smith = User:Jonmsmith
Once you convince yourself, will you put the material on Adams method back in my contribution? jonmsmith 15:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Please tell me that was some kind of Dutch humour that has not yet reached these shores? Jon Harrop 17:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse,
I'm wondering whether you might have time to look over equipartition theorem, and maybe leave some comments on its scientific peer review. Any insights you could bring would be very welcome — thanks! Hoping that you're doing well after all this time, Willow 16:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for the welcome. I have been impressed with the extent and quality of the mathematics articles on Wikipedia. Nice to know there's a community here.
I feel pretty strongly that things like this are important, and that we have a responsibility to give back to it (OK, motherhood statements).
Mike Henderson -- Mhender 13:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm looking for an uninvolved admin to help with dispute resolution. See the discussion near the bottom of my Talk page. Charles Matthews 20:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
The page Wikipedia:Articles for creation/List seems to be getting somewhat long, and I noticed that your bot maintains it. I generally try to avoid messing with bot-scripted pages, so I was wondering if you could condense the April days into one month and, since it ended several months ago, the 2006 months into one year. Thanks. -- kenb215 talk 02:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I've no idea how this could have happened, but your edit at Singular value decomposition added a plus/minus symbol at the start of the article. No big deal, and I corrected it, but I'm letting you know in case it's a bug. Cheers, Jitse Niesen ( talk) 00:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse, How do I find out "the total number" of contributions that I submitted to Wikipedia? I need a total number. This contr section doesn't tell me exact number of contributions submitted. There must be a way to find out exact number. Bosniak 02:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I came across the Clenshaw algorithm today and found it really interesting. Would you happen to know of an efficient way to convert a polynomial into its Chebyshev form? -- HappyCamper 19:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Re [1]: Some explanation may be appropriate here: [2] it's copy-and-pasted wiki-stalking, just ignore. Femto 16:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, fair enough. But he should probably go to AfD. It's expected that any normally accomplished is going to write books and lead projects. Herostratus 15:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse. You may be interested in the discussion I started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Template:Numerical algorithms. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 19:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey Jitse, I saw your nomination and started looking at Jon's userpage. I was just wondering if there was any chance that we could retain him and resolve the conflict he seems to have been at the center of. I would hate to lose a potential good contributer.-- Cronholm144 04:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Should I give it a shot? I am rather new but lack neither energy nor time at the present moment.-- Cronholm144 07:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Done (well not done but I left a nice message)here's hoping-- Cronholm144 08:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse. Could you assist Talk:Sieve_of_Eratosthenes#A_Deterministic_Boolean_Approach. I'm not sure how to proceed, as the arguments are turning into "I think", and "I doubt", without citing or checking the reliable sources provided. I have cited reliable sources, the code works, and theoretically correct based on the logical text of the sources, and is neutral in content. This does not propose anything new, however not conventional. The submission, I believe, is in fact correct, as it meets the requirements based on reliable sources. I have yet to read anything that refutes the runtime complexity of the algorithm presented, as per the lengthy discussion in the "talk" link above. This indicates a lack of fundamental computer science knowledge in time complexity on the part of the arguer, yet is still trying to argue this with me. This is an algorithmic challenge (computer science), not an equation (mathematics). Thanks. -- Ausples 06:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
That's really good timing. I've added hard data. -- Ausples 13:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey Jitse, Its me again..., I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks-- Cronholm144 22:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I like the work Bot does for AFC and I'd like to put in a request. Seeing as how many submissions get left behind, I want a marker put on pages by default, categorizing the pages into Category:Wikipedia article creation requests needing further review. The templates I'd like to work with are {{ afc n}} and {{ afc c}}, where n would be put on pages by default, not substituted, and then reviewers can change it to c when they finish a page. It's a bit difficult to describe, but I hope something can be done. ALTON .ıl 23:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse, I finally have some time to start doing a major revision of the page, which I had originally planned to do much earlier (after the RfC in March, recall your comments there). I hope you'll have some time to drop in every now and then and offer criticism. I have a bunch of books that I had ordered in March. Hope they will prove useful. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 01:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Jitse!
This is no big deal – I'm just curious why this article is on the list of current activity in mathematics. I didn't find the article on Oleg's list, and I can't see a category tag in the rock and roll article that's even remotely close to math. Oh – I checked the page history, and it certainly appears as if your 'bot put this article on the list.
Weird, eh? DavidCBryant 15:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Can't see myself why being the daughter of someone famous makes her famous, she's clearly not notable for her maths. However, if others disagree, so be it. jimfbleak 05:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse!, I have seen that in the last days the article on the divergent serie 1-2+3-4.... does not longer shows its star as a FEATURED article. Do you know what happened?. Best regards, Uruk (Spanish Wikipedia).
Hi there! Just wanted to let you know that no archive was made of yesterday's AFC yet. Thanks for all the work that your bot does for it!-- Xnuala ( talk)( Review) 01:27, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
The recent activity on the Acharya S article brings up something that has bothered me for a while. I don't think an article written by JP Holding belongs in wikipedia, in the links or otherwise. His own WP article was deleted, and he doesn't meet WP:RS, especially considering the standards espoused in WP:BLP. ^^James^^ 09:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse,
This is Mark, I wanted to contribute to the spectral method page. I couldn't find your comments on the talk on my contribution - under which talk is it? I'm new to this, in case it's not obvious. Under my talk, your comments aren't there - perhaps I'm blind!?!
Thanks,
Mark
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? -- Barberio 16:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. This is a reminder to people on the Melbourne meetup participation list that the next meetup has been arranged for 19 June. Could you indicate on the meetup page your likely attendence, or otherwise. Regards. - Cuddy Wifter 23:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse,
I'm just programming the Gram-Schmidt process and I got a bit confused in the section "Numerical stability" of the Gram-Schmidt article. To my mind, the superscripts in the last equation are wrong (I already wrote a comment on that on the "discussion" page before I discovered I could contact you..). Shouldn't it be either uk(k-1) on the left-hand side or all superscripts plus one on the right-hand side? Also, I think the projection operators need an additional k subscript: projuk,(k-1)uk,(k-2). Raneko 12:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jitse Niesen, all of you admins are quick to blame me, but when others personaly attack me - all of you are quiet. This behavior constitutes complete lack of objectivity on your "admin" part guys, but it's okay, I am used to it. For your information, here is a personal attack against me that none of you reacted http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Muhamed_Hevaji_Uskufi&action=history . Total lack of objectivity on part of wiki admins. As you can see, this user Jedi Svinje personally attacked me by saying (you're a retard) just because I included fact that Bosnian language dictionary was published 197 years before the first Serbian language dictionary. Bosniak 05:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Would you be willing to help me understand why the page was not acceptable?
Thank you,
MNAikidoka 04:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I saw that you contributed to unit matrix. There is a discussion going on to change it to "matrix of ones". Perhaps you have an opinion on this, see Talk:Unit matrix-- P.wormer 08:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)