Talk:Matrix theory

message: Would it be more correct to say that the value of a matrix can be represented as a rectangular array of numbers rather that it is a rectangular array?  Mathematics extracts an abstract structure from matrices and studies these properties, so we can have a matrix without having numbers written down, right?  (I'm probably getting pedantic but it's more than just a bunch of numbers). RJFJR 22:04, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
← I couldn't agree more. =)
--Cawas 04:34, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition?

message: X = \begin{bmatrix}x<sub>1</sub>\\ x<sub>2</sub>\\ x<sub>3</sub> \end{bmatrix} results in X = \begin{bmatrix}x1\\ x2\\ x3 \end{bmatrix}
Is there a way to use subscripts in a <math> tag? RJFJR 22:10, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
By the way, 
===to answer your question: ===
:Is there a way to use subscripts in a <math> tag? RJFJR 22:10, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
The answer is yes! See the source of this:
:
A =
\begin{bmatrix}
  a_{0} & a_{-1} & a_{-2} & \ldots & \ldots  &a_{-n+1}  \\
  a_{1} & a_0  & a_{-1} &  \ddots   &  &  \vdots \\
  a_{2}    & a_{1} & \ddots  & \ddots & \ddots& \vdots \\ 
 \vdots &  \ddots & \ddots &   \ddots  & a_{-1} & a_{-2}\\
 \vdots &         & \ddots & a_{1} & a_{0}&  a_{-1} \\
a_{m-1} &  \ldots & \ldots & a_{2} & a_{1} & a_{0}
\end{bmatrix}  
(stolen from Toeplitz matrix. Oleg Alexandrov 04:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Subscripts inside math tag?

message: :Is there a way to use subscripts in a <math> tag? RJFJR 22:10, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
The answer is yes! See the source of this:
:
A =
\begin{bmatrix}
  a_{0} & a_{-1} & a_{-2} & \ldots & \ldots  &a_{-n+1}  \\
  a_{1} & a_0  & a_{-1} &  \ddots   &  &  \vdots \\
  a_{2}    & a_{1} & \ddots  & \ddots & \ddots& \vdots \\ 
 \vdots &  \ddots & \ddots &   \ddots  & a_{-1} & a_{-2}\\
 \vdots &         & \ddots & a_{1} & a_{0}&  a_{-1} \\
a_{m-1} &  \ldots & \ldots & a_{2} & a_{1} & a_{0}
\end{bmatrix}  
(stolen from Toeplitz matrix. Oleg Alexandrov 04:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: to answer your question: 

message: See Talk:Matrix (mathematics)#Matrix (mathematics) vs. matrix theory for some discussion. Oleg Alexandrov 23:09, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Matrix (mathematics) vs. matrix theory

message: There isn't much left of the Matrix theory article.  What is left could probably be moved into matrix (mathematics).
I suggest we do that and make matrix theory a redirect to matrix (mathematics).  It saves us the trouble of trying to figure out what goes in each article.  The only danger is the combined article getting too big. RJFJR 18:33, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)
Today I got a message which I paste below. Oleg Alexandrov 19:07, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I have noticed your discussion on Talk:matrix (mathematics). I am having similar problems with graph (mathematics) and graph theory. Perhaps you want to have a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Graph_.28mathematics.29_vs_Graph_theory where I started a discussion on this subject. And welcome by the way :) MathMartin 12:40, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think we should not merge the articles. Rather, some things from Matrix (mathematics) which are more complicated should come here. What do you think could be transfered here?  Oleg Alexandrov 12:15, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: What you say makes sense (both options you suggest). I agree. Would you be willing to do the reorganization? Oleg Alexandrov 01:13, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, somehow I missed your reponse. I probably won't do it in the near future. At the moment I am more interested in graph theory topics. MathMartin 12:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought moving things myself. But somehow I think things are fine the way they are. Matrix theory is a summary of more advanced things, while Matrix has more elementary properties. So I would be inclided not to do any big changes on these pages. If you have other suggestions, I could implement them. Oleg Alexandrov  | talk 16:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Should we merge Matrix theory into Matrix (mathematics)?

message: :Hi, I have noticed your discussion on Talk:matrix (mathematics). I am having similar problems with graph (mathematics) and graph theory. Perhaps you want to have a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Graph_.28mathematics.29_vs_Graph_theory where I started a discussion on this subject. And welcome by the way :) MathMartin 12:40, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think we should not merge the articles. Rather, some things from Matrix (mathematics) which are more complicated should come here. What do you think could be transfered here?  Oleg Alexandrov 12:15, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What you say makes sense (both options you suggest). I agree. Would you be willing to do the reorganization? Oleg Alexandrov 01:13, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, somehow I missed your reponse. I probably won't do it in the near future. At the moment I am more interested in graph theory topics. MathMartin 12:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought moving things myself. But somehow I think things are fine the way they are. Matrix theory is a summary of more advanced things, while Matrix has more elementary properties. So I would be inclided not to do any big changes on these pages. If you have other suggestions, I could implement them. Oleg Alexandrov  | talk 16:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Matrix vs matrix theory

message: Lilar recently edited parts of this article transforming it into an amusing and informative parody of its former self.  
Should the pre-Lilar changes be kept as Matrix Theory (math) and the parody as Matrix Theory (film)?
 —Xojo  (talk)  05:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split into Matrix Theory (math) and Matrix Theory (film)? 

message: Substituted at 21:51, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment