Talk:Arithmetic: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Schmitt |
imported>Paul Wormer |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC) | [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Please go ahead, it is a Wiki, remove all learned terms. I was not quite happy, indeed, with being somewhere in the middle between informal and formal maths. But I found it useful to have a symbol for the set of all (real) numbers, and then I thought why not use ℝ? And then I thought why not mention its official name? And so one thing led to another. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 06:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:15, 6 January 2010
More elementary?
Paul, it is a good idea to have a non-formal article on arithmetic. What do you think about making it even more elementary? (The more formal treatment can be left to the articles on rational and real numbers, etc.) Most, if not all, mathematicel jargon could be avoided. Take e.g.:
"Two (or more) numbers can be added (denoted by +), and the result is again a number. This addition does not depend on the order in which it is performed. For example, 3 + 5 ≡ 5 + 3 (= 8)."
It is not necessary to use "binary", "commutative", "field". Even "real number" can be replaced by "number".
Peter Schmitt 23:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Please go ahead, it is a Wiki, remove all learned terms. I was not quite happy, indeed, with being somewhere in the middle between informal and formal maths. But I found it useful to have a symbol for the set of all (real) numbers, and then I thought why not use ℝ? And then I thought why not mention its official name? And so one thing led to another. --Paul Wormer 06:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)