User talk:Wcherowi: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Wcherowi/Archive 6) (bot |
|||
| (20 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
||
}} |
}} |
||
==Re: Determinant 1== |
|||
Sorry about revising the revision on the Modular Group page; i hit submit without adding a comment; the reason unit determinant differs from determinant 1 is that in a ring (such as the ring of all 2x2 matrices, or in this case Z), a unit is anything invertible. In particular, the original reading could lead to an interpretation that the determinant was 1 or -1, which if you remove the identification criterion, reads as a quotient of GL2Z rather than SL2Z. The example I gave had determinant 1, but I meant it to have determinant -1, whoops! |
|||
Sorry if this isn't the place to chat with a user, I'm not super well-versed with this :) |
|||
== Warning Templates == |
== Warning Templates == |
||
| Line 18: | Line 23: | ||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion |
||
== |
== Happy First Edit Day! == |
||
<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;"> |
|||
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2020|2020 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. |
|||
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|Wikipedia arbitration process]]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. |
|||
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC) |
|||
</td></tr> |
|||
</table> |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Coordination/MMS/04&oldid=990308269 --> |
|||
== Catenary contribution deletion == |
|||
Hello, |
|||
why did you delete my contribution? |
|||
My solution is valid and verified by faculty peers. |
|||
If you have any mathematical or logical criticism, please elaborate. |
|||
If not, please do not strike down with no reason. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:R.zalman|R.zalman]] ([[User talk:R.zalman#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/R.zalman|contribs]]) 21:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Your solution was unsourced as I mentioned in my edit summary. Wikipedia does not publish original work (see [[WP:NOR]]), so no matter how correct the solution was, it can not be used until it is published in a reliable source.--[[User:Wcherowi|Bill Cherowitzo ]] ([[User talk:Wcherowi#top|talk]]) 22:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
== Percentage point == |
|||
Dear Wcherowi, |
|||
The changes I made you reverted as "good faith edit". However, I'm afraid that the current definition of the percentage point may be interpreted in the way that 44% - 40% = 4% is wrong. Of course, it is 4 percentage points as well. I am not against "percentage points". However, from the mathematical point of view, the arithmetic difference of two percentages is the value in percentages again. So, I wanted to ask why did you revert my contribution? I'm looking forward to your reply, so I can improve my contribution. |
|||
[[User:ToMiBi|ToMiBi]] ([[User talk:ToMiBi|talk]]) 16:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
:The whole idea of introducing the term "percentage point" is to avoid the confusion that you are trying to introduce. Percentage points are not percentages. Your insistence on saying that m% - n% = (m-n)% is just a meaningless manipulation of symbols. While it is true that you can express a percentage point as a percent, it is not given by this simple-minded formula. A change from 1% to 5% is a change of 4 percentage points, but an increase of 400% (and not 4% as you would like to say), and the example in the article, from 40% to 44% is likewise a 4 pp increase, but a 10% increase. You can not equate percentage points with percentages because the percentages depend on the magnitude of the quantities and the percentage points do not.--[[User:Wcherowi|Bill Cherowitzo ]] ([[User talk:Wcherowi#top|talk]]) 23:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
The water level indicator displays the water level in a rainwater tank from 0 to 100%. It corresponds to the volume of water divided by the volume of the rainwater tank. Let's say (due to the rain), there is a change of water level from 1% to 5%. I agree that the '''volume of water''' has relatively increased by 400%. However, it is still true that the '''water level''' has increased by 4%, since water level is defined as the volume of water divided by the volume of the rainwater tank. And that volume of new water corresponds exactly to 4% of water level change. In other words, '''if the total water volume divided by the tank volume is 5%, could you explain why the new/added water volume divided by the tank volume is not 4%???''' |
|||
So, the problematic part is not the percentage itself, but 1) expressing what is a base of percentages, 2) providing the information if the increase is expressed as a relative change (fold change) or as a difference (absolute change or actual change). |
|||
Wikipedia says: |
|||
"For example, moving up from 40% to 44% is a 4 percentage point increase, but is a 10 percent increase in what is being measured." |
|||
To me, it is not clearly defined what is being measured... "The water volume or the water level"? It is a relative increase or an absolute increase? |
|||
Moreover, if 40% + 4 pp = 44%, then for sure it implies that 4 pp = 4% (otherwise we cannot sum up these numbers). |
|||
I hope you can see my point. |
|||
[[User:ToMiBi|ToMiBi]] ([[User talk:ToMiBi|talk]]) 19:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
::No, no. You are making the same mistake in different terms. Percentages do not add or subtract as their numerical values. A simple example will show this. Suppose you have 100 ml. of milk that is 30% cream, and 100 ml. of milk that is 50% cream. Add the two together and you have 200 ml. of milk that is 40% cream (and not 80% cream, as you would have it). Another example shows that you can not use a simple additive rule without taking into account the total volumes. Again, 100 ml. of 30% milk and now 300 ml. of 50% milk. Combined this gives 400 ml. of 45% milk.--[[User:Wcherowi|Bill Cherowitzo ]] ([[User talk:Wcherowi#top|talk]]) 20:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 2px dashed #FF0000; background-color: gold;" |
|||
I completely agree with your example. There is no discussion about that. Or are you suggesting that I can use percentage points instead? I.e. add or subtract p.p. as their numerical values? In that case I do not agree with you (200 ml. of milk that is 80 p.p. cream makes no sense to me). Moreover, my example is telling a different story. You basically said that I'm not taking into account the total volumes. Ok, let's fix this. If rainwater tank volume is 100 liters and there is just 1 liter of rainwater, then the volume of rainwater corresponds to 1% of the tank volume (water level indicator displays 1%). If due to the rain, there is a 4 liters increase, then there are 5 liters of rainwater in total. Thus, new water level corresponds to 5% of tank volume (and the water level indicator displays 5%). So, '''could you explain, please, why the new/added water volume divided by the tank volume is not 4%'''? |
|||
| style="text-align:center;" |[[File:Balloons-aj.svg|55x55px]] |
|||
[[User:ToMiBi|ToMiBi]] ([[User talk:ToMiBi|talk]]) 14:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
| style="text-align:center;" width="100%" |<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; color:darkblue">Hey, '''Wcherowi'''. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the [[Wikipedia:Birthday Committee|Wikipedia Birthday Committee]]!</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; color:darkblue">Have a great day! |
|||
: {{tps}} For a 100 L barrel that originally has 1 L of fluid in it and then later has 5 L of fluid in it, the following things are all true: |
|||
[[User:Brachy0008|'''<span style="color:blue">Brachy</span><small><span style="color:black">08</span></small>''']] <sub><small>[[User talk:Brachy0008|<span style="color:green">(Talk)</span>]]</small></sub> 09:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:* The water level has increased by 400%. |
|||
| style="text-align:right;" |[[File:Face-smile.svg|55x55px]] |
|||
:* The water level has increased by 4 percentage points. |
|||
|} |
|||
:* The water level has increased by 4% ''of the volume of the tank''. |
|||
==Happy First Edit Day!== |
|||
: The last two statements are synonymous, the first is not synonymous but is equivalent in this particular example. I agree with Bill that your addition to [[percentage point]] did not improve the article. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 15:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## --> |
|||
:: Dear {{reply to|JayBeeEll}}, I really appreciate your reply. Thank you. OK then. Let's find the way to say that 1) if clearly defined, the p.p. is synonymous to the percentage (see your last two statements) and 2) everyone should be aware of what is being measured (see the definition on Wiki and your very first statement: 400% of what? If not spoken, it could be "... of the volume of the tank". To me, the change from "The water level has increased by 400%." to "The water level has ''relatively'' increased by 400%." makes a huge difference, since, the ''relative'' increase is expressed as a ratio, where the denominator represents an old value - and that defines the basis for the percentages.) May I ask you to clarify the definition on wiki, please? Maybe I am not the best person for that. But at least I can see that the current definition has flaws. [[User:ToMiBi|ToMiBi]] ([[User talk:ToMiBi|talk]]) 19:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
{{ombox |
|||
::: {{tq|the p.p. is synonymous to the percentage}} No: as Bill has explained several times, p.p. is the unit of measurement of a change in a percentage. The true statement is that some (but not all) uses of the words "percentage point" can be rephrased to not use those words, by referring to an absolute change whose size is a percentage of some other quantity, as in the 3rd bullet point above. But there are also examples (Bill has offered several) where no such substitution is possible. {{tq|To me, the change from "The water level has increased by 400%." to "The water level has ''relatively'' increased by 400%." makes a huge difference}} I understand that ''you'' believe there is a difference between those things, but that is because you are confused. Percentages are ''always'' relative measures; the phrase "X increased by 400%" ''always'' means ''... by 400% of its previous value". The existing definitions are completely fine; it is your preferred interpretations that are in error, and once you adjust them, everything will be ok. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 19:43, 9 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
| name = First Edit Day |
|||
| image = [[File:Twemoji2 1f5d3.svg{{!}}alt=Calendar emoji|50px]] |
|||
| imageright = [[File:Twemoji2 1f389.svg{{!}}alt=Party popper emoji|50px]] |
|||
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(to right, #c5c5ec, #bfd1f2, #a9efea); |
|||
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center; |
|||
| plainlinks = yes |
|||
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big><br />Hi Wcherowi! On behalf of the [[WP:Birthday Committee|Birthday Committee]], I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Wcherowi&dir=prev&limit=1 your first edit] and became a Wikipedian! [[User:The Herald|The Herald (Benison)]] ([[User talk:The Herald|talk]]) 03:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
}} |
|||
Latest revision as of 19:35, 10 August 2024
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Re: Determinant 1
[edit]Sorry about revising the revision on the Modular Group page; i hit submit without adding a comment; the reason unit determinant differs from determinant 1 is that in a ring (such as the ring of all 2x2 matrices, or in this case Z), a unit is anything invertible. In particular, the original reading could lead to an interpretation that the determinant was 1 or -1, which if you remove the identification criterion, reads as a quotient of GL2Z rather than SL2Z. The example I gave had determinant 1, but I meant it to have determinant -1, whoops!
Sorry if this isn't the place to chat with a user, I'm not super well-versed with this :)
Warning Templates
[edit]
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Fibonacci number: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you.
Re: Kepler Fraud
[edit]Thanks for revising my edit instead of deleting it. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion
Happy First Edit Day!
[edit]
|
Hey, Wcherowi. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!Have a great day! | 
|
Happy First Edit Day!
[edit] | Happy First Edit Day! Hi Wcherowi! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC) |  |