Talk:Whittaker and Watson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Abramowitz and Stegun is a modern successor" is tremendously innacurate. How does this type of post survive?

Would you like to explain that? We are talking about authoritative texts on special functions. If you want to make the point that A&S is not a comparable text on the side of analysis, yes, that can be mentioned. Charles Matthews 14:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/h/i/Talk%7EWhittaker_and_Watson_f964.html"