Difference between revisions of "Talk:Residue calculus"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: "Some mathematicians reject the method of residue calculus, as it does not rely on elementary proofs." Is this actually true? Perhaps there are a few obscure mathematicians somewhere wit...) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Is this actually true? Perhaps there are a few obscure mathematicians somewhere with such a view, but this sentence indicates that residue calculus is not generally accepted. That's just not accurate. | Is this actually true? Perhaps there are a few obscure mathematicians somewhere with such a view, but this sentence indicates that residue calculus is not generally accepted. That's just not accurate. | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Some editors at this wiki seem to have an irrational fear of complex numbers. Dunno why, and I'm not sure that there's a source for these claims. --[[User:Commodore Guff|KevinS]] 23:51, 3 January 2009 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 04:51, January 4, 2009
"Some mathematicians reject the method of residue calculus, as it does not rely on elementary proofs."
Is this actually true? Perhaps there are a few obscure mathematicians somewhere with such a view, but this sentence indicates that residue calculus is not generally accepted. That's just not accurate.
- Some editors at this wiki seem to have an irrational fear of complex numbers. Dunno why, and I'm not sure that there's a source for these claims. --KevinS 23:51, 3 January 2009 (EST)