Talk:Convergence

message: I've moved these edits here, for discussion:
Two items are said to be convergent if in time they become increasingly like each other. Equally they are divergent if they keep moving apart. However, the word convergent is often used with the second item left implicit.
This isn't really clear enough. There is stuff around on technical convergence, evolutionary convergence by different paths to the same result, and so on. 
One question of interest is whether WikiPedia is in broad terms a convergent or divergent phenomenon. Will the number of pages grow without limit (which is possible given arbitrarily long phrases can be used for page names) or will WikiPedia start evolving toward a finished work, or a work where limits exist to changes (with news and topical issues only changing)?
General policy is not to be too navel-gazing about WP on article pages.
Charles Matthews 08:08, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: old comments

message: I have some qualms about this page's structure.  When I was first redirected to it, I was confused by the common-sense description.  I think that my confusion resulted from the fact that I could see no introduction or clear structure to the page.  I suggest that this article should either become a disambiguation page among informal and formal meanings of the term, or that it should be more clearly structured.  I would be willing to make the necessary changes in either case, but I want to know what others think. NatusRoma 06:48, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page structure 

message: Another reason besides the one stated in the edit summary for removal of those two sentences is the following. The sentence:
:The transcendental number Pi provides a classic example of a number that can only be approximated using an infinite series. 
is not correct as stated. The infinte series gives the exact value, not an approximation. Also, π can be very easily written in just a finite series, like 
:π = π+0 +...0
That sentence should have said that
: Any partial sum (finite series) containing only rational terms can never be exactly equal to π. As such, π can be only written in an infinite series with rational coefficients, and otherwise one gets only an approximation.
But this would have been too long and complicated paragraph, to insert between two sentences which were making sence together but not separately. Oleg Alexandrov 23:35, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are absolutely right. ... I meant to say that "no finite series can effectively compute &pi" (which I think precludes defining &pi in terms of itself as in: π = π+0 +...0).  Even so, I'm not so sure if that would have made sense in the spot where I put it.  Vonkje 02:02, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On my recent removal 

message: It was not clear from the article, but there is a well-known convergence for neural networks, I thought I would have found it here but did not.Josh Froelich 14:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another convergence for computing 

message: What is intended to be the distinction between this page and convergence (disambiguation)?
I believe this page should be used for more literal uses relating to converging in some manner, while the disambiuation should be for topics where the connection is less obvious. This is why I removed telecommunications convergence from this page (it was already on the other anyway).
Or should we just merge both - I would have done this, were it not for the size of the combined list. The way, the truth, and the light (talk) 11:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The purpose of this page 

message: This page was tagged for clean-up in July 2009. I couldn't find the reason, but a lot of issues seem to have been addressed. What do others think still needs looking at here ? Boleyn3 (talk) 09:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The other thing to do here would be to remove further entries that aren't referred to as "Convergence". It seems unlikely to me that things like the Integral test for convergence are often referred to as simply "convergence", but I don't feel qualified enough to judge those things correctly when it comes to mathematics. I suppose that there are other entries on the page that could have similar issues, such as the Democratic Convergence Party-Reflection Group. Dekimasuよ! 07:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-up