Talk:Supermatrix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The contents of this article need to be merged with block matrix. This article should really discuss the notion of a Z₂-graded matrix (i.e. a linear transformation between super vector spaces). -- Fropuff 18:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't some of the regression-analysis oriented material stand alone, really? I would agree that stuff at the beginning and end should be at block matrix. Charles Matthews 19:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I'm not sure the best place to stick it though. Maybe the authors have some suggestions. -- Fropuff 19:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Supermatrices vs. Block Matrices

These two terms are used in different disciplines. Google search shows hundreds of references to supermatrices. This entry was written with focus on the use of supermatrices within the statistics and you are welcome to add another applications, as, eg., from tensor analysis, etc. Please do that and do not try to destroy another person's work. David Cruise 23:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to destroy another's work. On the contrary I want to preserve it. But I also want to put it in the right place. We shouldn't have two articles which describe the same concept. It is appropriate to merge. As for which title should be preferred, I think in this case that block matrix would be better as supermatrix has another meaning which is entirely unrelated. We can (and should) put a disambiguation notice at the top of this page directing users to the appropriate concept. -- Fropuff 23:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

By the way your last edit to this page deleted a large section of text in addition to adding a reference. Did you mean to do that? If so you should state that in the edit summary and give reasons. -- Fropuff

[edit] Takeover

It is likely that you secured the majority opinion before you posted your redirect notice, as Charles Matthews supported your proposal within less than fifteen minutes. We both know that your assertion that "I don't want to destroy another's work. On the contrary I want to preserve it" is only a platitude. What you really want is to take over this entry and use it for yourself. So have it. I have better things to do with my life than to waste time with people like you. David Cruise 06:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC).

That's rather harsh, don't you think? I'm trying to work with you here. Can we try and be constructive? I certainly did not "secure anyone's position" before posting the merge notice. Charles watches over thousands of math pages. His comment was entirely of his own volition. -- Fropuff 06:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I was going to suggest getting User:Michael Hardy involved. The inferences made are unfounded. Charles Matthews 07:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

The merge tags direct the discussion to Talk:Block matrix. None-the-less, I'll post an opinion here:

• Merge. This appears to be substantially similar to block matrix. It also fails to cover the other notion of a supermatrix, coming from supersymmetry, so that lead to some momentary confusion. linas 20:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Yeah, this should be merged into block matrix. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge - if this discussion is still ongoing. Madmath789 08:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)