Talk:E (mathematical constant)

message: In e (mathematical constant)#History there is a simple statement that the first time someone designated a symbol for this constant was Leibnitz in correspondence with Huygens. It seems pretty straightforward to me but there is  tag. The reason given is that Bernoulli used this value earlier in his studies on compound interest. That is irrelevant. The statement talks about the first use of the symbol not the first use of the constant. I replaced the original sentence by one that made the position clear. And I added a citation that clearly stated that the first use of the symbol 'b' was by Leibnitz. This has been reverted. I shall restore my edit unless someone can explain why something so obvious needs clarification. OrewaTel (talk) 06:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: To me, the change by OrewaTel seems to be an improvement.  But I think the confusion begins with the second paragraph of the "History" section.  It says that "the constant " occurs in Bernoulli's solution.  I guess that Bernoulli actually wrote an expression or a numerical value, and not the letter e.  Perhaps that e in the second paragraph should be omitted.  But then there would be 5 successive occurrences of "the constant" and some readers might start to wonder whether another constant is being referred to.  And for the same reason, perhaps the first paragraph should refer to "natural logarithms" instead of " logarithms to the base e". JonH (talk) 14:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're absolutely right, and I should have read the whole section more carefully before reverting.  My apologies. I will restore your change.  --JBL (talk) 20:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't help that Leibnitz used the letter 'b' (Was this in honour of Bernoulli? Total guess but looks plausible. Needs cite.) rather than the current symbol 'e'. Maybe that section needs a little more work. OrewaTel (talk) 21:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed - Really? 

message: The redirect 7.3984 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Plantdrew (talk) 22:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:7.3984]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: It strikes me that the lede of the article spends too much space on various definitions of the constant. Currently two whole paragraphs of the lede are devoted to various representations and definitions. I think these could be summarized in plain English, and details deferred to a later section.  (WP:MTAA warns against too many equations in the lede, and I think they are certainly excessive here.) Thoughts? Tito Omburo (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede dwells too much on details of definition 

message: The redirect E (mathematical constant has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 01:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:E (mathematical constant]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Bernoulli the year of discovery is stated as 1683 while in this article it is 1685. Can someone clarify the discrepancy. Thanks 192.56.200.12 (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Bernoulli's work wasn't published until 1685.  Both articles give 1683 as the discovery date.  Tito Omburo (talk) 15:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  year of discovery