User talk:JCSantos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello JCSantos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 

And one remark. Rewriting html formulas in LaTeX is good, unless it creates images, which is not good. :) That is, PNG images embedded in text usually look of different size than text around them, and should be avoided, that's per the math style manual. Otherwise, both HTML and LaTeX formulas are acceptable, I would think. Enjoy wiki-ing! Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Oleg, except that it's weird to see something like "√2\," instead of either √2 or \sqrt{2}. Michael Hardy 00:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I think that l ≠ 0 looks much better than \ell\neq0. And you (Michael Hardy) didn't have to be agressive about my understanding of TeX. I understand it well enough to have my name on the list of the contributers to the TeX FAQ. Where's your name there? The same thing applies to The not so short introduction to LaTeX2ε.JCSantos 14:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

So why don't you just use non-TeX notation, thus:

x ∈ A

instead of writing

x ∈ A?

Michael Hardy 22:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


I like the later more than the former. Besides, this has nothing to do with the pages that I wrote and that you decided to rewrite. In those pages, what I did was to replace things like \{z\in\mathbb{C}|1<|z|<2\} (which creates an image) with things like { z ∈ C | 1 < | z | < 2 } (which does not create an image and which is equally readable).

Now that I answered your question, please explain why you accused me of having a “less-than-perfect understanding of TeX”. Not that I claim it to be “perfect” but, of course, an expression like the one you wrote strongly suggests a feeble knowledge of it.JCSantos 07:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Cauchy.png

Thank you for the Image Cauchy.png. Although it illustrates the geometric interpretation, there is something funny about it. It is always possible to choose c such that the vector (f'(c),g'(c)) points in the same direction as (f(b)−f(a),g(b)−g(a)). In everyday language, if you drive (on a flat plain) along a road from A to B, and your destination (B) is due North with respect to your point of departure (A), then however contorted the road may be, at some point of the trip you're headed due North. In the image, however, the oriented tangent vector at c points in the opposite direction; it is an "accidental" solution to the equation in c. This should be clear if you imagine the curve slowly straightening up. Would it be much trouble to make a new image in which the directional tangent vector at c agrees with the direction of (Δf,Δg)?  --Lambiam 10:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll think about it. Maybe tomorrow. — JCSantos (talk) 15:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Done. — JCSantos (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Great!  --Lambiam 22:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)