Talk:Mathematics/Archive 8

message: :Neolithic monuments on the British Isles are constructed using Pythagorean triples. 
This, at a minimum, requires a source. There is a long-standing conjecture that Neolithic peoples could  have used Pythagorean triples for a right angle; it was stated about Egypt, and I believe Morris Klein is responsible for it. I know of no evidence for it anywhere, and the British Isles is a most unlikely place to find some: ropes will not survive, and few of the British megaliths have right angles. Septentrionalis 17:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Megalithic mathematics

message: The list under this heading seems a bit biased toward areas of application (e.g., Mathematical physics, Mathematical economics) rather than methods of applied math. (e.g., Representation theory, differential equations, approximation theory). To an extent this is also true of things listed at applied mathematics. Some fields, like fluid dynamics, are in both categories. But I think it fits in more with the other headings to list subfields of math. like ODEs, PDEs, etc. preferentially over Mathematical biology and such, or to list more of the subfields at least. JJL 21:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe part of the reason for this is that it is slightly ridiculous to refer to representation theory as applied maths, even though it is used in mathematical physics. JPD (talk) 09:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't see JLL referring to representation theory as applied mathematics, just as a method of it.  That's certainly a reasonable statement.  Even if one excludes what you might consider rather "esoteric" applications in mathematical physics, there are still plenty of applications to very concrete situations involving cryptography, crystallography, error-correcting codes, etc.  --C S (Talk) 10:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see putting representation theory under the heading Applied mathematics as referring to it as applied mathematics. My point was that while something like mathematical physics may be appropriate under such a heading, it wouldn't be right to put representation theory as a whole there. (Representation theory as a whole is not represented by that link at the moment, either!) Anyway, I think the reason the list is "biased" to areas of application, is because the methods are also methods/areas of pure maths. I did not mean to imply that mathematical physics is the only application of representation theory, and the question of whether cryptography, error-correcting codes or even mathematical physics are considered "applied maths" is another issue altogether. It would probably be a good idea to put differential equations in there, however. JPD (talk) 15:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't care about rep. theory (which I assumed, without checking, would go to a subset of approx. theory--I was thinking of Fourier series representations, not group theory) in particular. Clearly, as it stands it should not be in applied math. I meant more about methods/areas like approx. theory vice areas of applicability like math. bio.--applied math. over applicable math. JJL 05:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea to me. JPD (talk) 10:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Applied mathematics

message: The section Notation, language, and rigor talks about mathematical jargon, but as has been mentioned, this refers to words. Perhaps code would be more appropriate to refer to the notation itself, or perhaps language. I feel this sentence stops a bit abruptly with music, and would like to bring it back to finish with something about the mathematical notation. Stephen B Streater 11:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jargon