1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 44:
Line 44: + +
→+/- notation deleted?: No, it cannot be said either way
: I am still confused by "Since in many situations only the positive square root has any meaning". Don't you mean "Since in many situations both square roots are needed"? The square root symbol is for the nonnegative root, but often both roots are needed. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 02:50, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
: I am still confused by "Since in many situations only the positive square root has any meaning". Don't you mean "Since in many situations both square roots are needed"? The square root symbol is for the nonnegative root, but often both roots are needed. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 02:50, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
::It could be said either way. The way I worded it, I hope, the positive root takes precendence, and both are included when the situation requires it. It could just as easily be worded the other way. Whichever consensus thinks is clearest and most useful to the target audience? [[User:Human|Human]] 14:12, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
::It could be said either way. The way I worded it, I hope, the positive root takes precendence, and both are included when the situation requires it. It could just as easily be worded the other way. Whichever consensus thinks is clearest and most useful to the target audience? [[User:Human|Human]] 14:12, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
::: No, it cannot be said either way. It does not help to have two contradictory definitions of the square root sign. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
Wolfram says:
Wolfram says: