Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
107 bytes removed ,  15:58, August 25, 2009
removed irrelevant comment
Line 50: Line 50:  
:::Your definition of an elementary proof does not withstand scrutiny for the reasons I stated, which you did not address.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:46, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
 
:::Your definition of an elementary proof does not withstand scrutiny for the reasons I stated, which you did not address.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:46, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
   −
::::The proof in question (Selberg) was elementary by either standard, so I don't think that's relevant here.  I don't wish to argue about what would be the best definition of an elementary proof, or the importance elementary methods, which I appreciate.  I just want to point out that the definition of "elementary proof" given here is not actually how the term is used in the mathematical literature, and I have supported this with a citation.  As such I think this page needs some adjustment -- it gives a definition of "elementary proof" which is used, as far as I can tell until you provide a citation, by no one except you.  It's quite possible that this would be a superior usage of the term, and I have no problem with the ideas on the page as it stands.  I would only ask to add a disclaimer that when mathematicians use the term "elementary proof", this is not always what they mean (as indicated by the AoC example above). --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 11:58, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
+
::::I don't wish to argue about what would be the best definition of an elementary proof, or the importance elementary methods, which I appreciate.  I just want to point out that the definition of "elementary proof" given here is not actually how the term is used in the mathematical literature, and I have supported this with a citation.  As such I think this page needs some adjustment -- it gives a definition of "elementary proof" which is used, as far as I can tell until you provide a citation, by no one except you.  It's quite possible that this would be a superior usage of the term, and I have no problem with the ideas on the page as it stands.  I would only ask to add a disclaimer that when mathematicians use the term "elementary proof", this is not always what they mean (as indicated by the AoC example above). --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 11:58, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
SkipCaptcha
710

edits

Navigation menu