Jump to content

Talk:Choice sequence: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Rating article for WikiProject Mathematics. Quality: Start / Priority: Low / Field: foundations (script assisted)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{maths rating|class=Start|priority=Low|field=foundations}}
I'll flesh this article out soon, I swears it. [[User:ILikeThings|ILikeThings]] ([[User talk:ILikeThings|talk]]) 07:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I'll flesh this article out soon, I swears it. [[User:ILikeThings|ILikeThings]] ([[User talk:ILikeThings|talk]]) 07:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)



Revision as of 13:07, 25 February 2010

WikiProject iconMathematics Start‑class Low‑priority
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

I'll flesh this article out soon, I swears it. ILikeThings (talk) 07:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


"Let \alpha\in n denote the relation "the sequence α begins with the initial sequence n"" Is this notation really correct? \in is used in two different ways in the same formula. Twanvl (talk) 23:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's totally silly notation, I know. This is what I've seen in the literature, though. And I think it's used consistently throughout the article (as far as I can tell, the axiom of open data is the only place where the \in predicate is used twice, and it means the same thing in both cases). ILikeThings (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]