Talk:Robert Berger (mathematician): Difference between revisions
Cje~enwiki (talk | contribs) Can anyone help? |
Paul August (talk | contribs) reply to Cje: what is the contraction? and yes, add "background" to article. |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
--[[User:Cje|Cje]] 09:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC) |
--[[User:Cje|Cje]] 09:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC) |
||
:I don't understand how exactly this article contradicts the information in [[Aperiodic tiling]]. Could you be more specific? Both say that Burger invented the "first [[aperiodic]] set of [[tile]]s consisting of 20,426 distinct tile shapes … in 1966", correct? Is it the qualifying phrase "by using the rules of [[Penrose tiling]] and the [[Golden Rule]]" that you find problematic? Is this because [[Penrose tiling]] hadn't yet been described in 1966? Perhaps (and this is purely a guess), that the phrase is just describing the kind of tiling rules used, making no assertion as to chronology? Any any case I think the the phrase and link [[Golden Rule]] is wrong. Perhaps [[Golden ratio]] was meant? As a specific answer to your question 2 above, whatever the correct history and background is, it should (IMHO) be added to this article. It is quite ok (and is actually a good thing) to have "repeating" content. [[User:Paul August|Paul August]] [[User_talk:Paul August|☎]] 20:35, August 16, 2005 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:35, 16 August 2005
Several problems here:
1. This brief article contradicts the more detailed article at Aperiodic tiling. This article implies that Berger used results from Penrose's work, but the Aperiodic Tiling article gives a completely different history (which is backed up by various articles I found on line). Essentially Dr Hao Wang posed the question if the tiling problem is computable: Berger first proved that the problem is not computable (which implies that there is an aperiodic solution) and then found the first aperiodic solution.
2. This background (which addresses the "too technical" flag) is well covered in Aperiodic tiling. So does it need repeating here?
3. I can't find anything on Robert Berger's life. He's not in the Mathematical Genealogy project - well only if he is the German Robert W Berger and the details don's seem to fit. He is not listed as a Ph D STudent of Dr Wang [http://genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/html/id.phtml?id=29869
Finally, he seems to have written only the one paper - at least in the area of tiling.
R. Berger, The undecidability of the domino problem, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 66, 1966.]
Did he go off to Wall Street rather than pursuing a career in academic mathematics?
Dr/Professor/Mr Berger - if you are reading this please correct me if I am wrong!!
Maybe we should merge? I'm flagging on The Maths articles needing attention to see what happens.
--Cje 09:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- I don't understand how exactly this article contradicts the information in Aperiodic tiling. Could you be more specific? Both say that Burger invented the "first aperiodic set of tiles consisting of 20,426 distinct tile shapes … in 1966", correct? Is it the qualifying phrase "by using the rules of Penrose tiling and the Golden Rule" that you find problematic? Is this because Penrose tiling hadn't yet been described in 1966? Perhaps (and this is purely a guess), that the phrase is just describing the kind of tiling rules used, making no assertion as to chronology? Any any case I think the the phrase and link Golden Rule is wrong. Perhaps Golden ratio was meant? As a specific answer to your question 2 above, whatever the correct history and background is, it should (IMHO) be added to this article. It is quite ok (and is actually a good thing) to have "repeating" content. Paul August ☎ 20:35, August 16, 2005 (UTC)