Talk:Casorati–Weierstrass theorem: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m Signing comment by 132.230.30.117 - "" |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Is there a mistake in the first paragraph? Is it me or should that be |z-z_0| < delta, not epsilon? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.178.252.98|81.178.252.98]] ([[User talk:81.178.252.98|talk]]) 23:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Is there a mistake in the first paragraph? Is it me or should that be |z-z_0| < delta, not epsilon? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.178.252.98|81.178.252.98]] ([[User talk:81.178.252.98|talk]]) 23:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
: There's no mistake. To be absolutely pedantic, one should say that for every complex number w and for every positive epsilon, there exists a complex z0 and a positive delta such that |f(z)-w|<epsilon for all z such that |z-z0|<delta. But the theorem is just as well stated if we put delta=epsilon (the statement is more clear to read and it remains correct). This is what the article does and that is why there is no typo. |
: There's no mistake. To be absolutely pedantic, one should say that for every complex number w and for every positive epsilon, there exists a complex z0 and a positive delta such that |f(z)-w|<epsilon for all z such that |z-z0|<delta. But the theorem is just as well stated if we put delta=epsilon (the statement is more clear to read and it remains correct). This is what the article does and that is why there is no typo. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/132.230.30.117|132.230.30.117]] ([[User talk:132.230.30.117|talk]]) 14:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 14:46, 6 November 2009
Mathematics Start‑class Mid‑priority | ||||||||||
|
Felice Casorati, as described in his article, was a painter. Did he really develop this theorem, or is another Felice Casorati meant? --Abdull 13:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- It appears that there were 2 of them - http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Mathematicians/Casorati.html seems to be the mathematician. Madmath789 13:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Is there a mistake in the first paragraph? Is it me or should that be |z-z_0| < delta, not epsilon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.252.98 (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- There's no mistake. To be absolutely pedantic, one should say that for every complex number w and for every positive epsilon, there exists a complex z0 and a positive delta such that |f(z)-w|<epsilon for all z such that |z-z0|<delta. But the theorem is just as well stated if we put delta=epsilon (the statement is more clear to read and it remains correct). This is what the article does and that is why there is no typo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.230.30.117 (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)