Difference between revisions of "Talk:Complex number"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
An article like this is going to be read by a lot of 12 and 13 year olds. It shouldn't start with notation as heavy as what's being used. That notation should be introduced in an intermediate section, though the introductory section will probably be fairly short.--[[User:MCrawford|MCrawford]] 19:09, 22 June 2006 (EDT) | An article like this is going to be read by a lot of 12 and 13 year olds. It shouldn't start with notation as heavy as what's being used. That notation should be introduced in an intermediate section, though the introductory section will probably be fairly short.--[[User:MCrawford|MCrawford]] 19:09, 22 June 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Two questions: (1) I've seen a number of articles that involve square roots and complex numbers. None of them have done a good job of explaining the notion of multiple roots, but this is obviously very important. Thoughts? | ||
| + | (2) How do I get my name and the date this was made to appear after I post in the discussion section of an article? | ||
Revision as of 10:07, 8 July 2006
An article like this is going to be read by a lot of 12 and 13 year olds. It shouldn't start with notation as heavy as what's being used. That notation should be introduced in an intermediate section, though the introductory section will probably be fairly short.--MCrawford 19:09, 22 June 2006 (EDT)
Two questions: (1) I've seen a number of articles that involve square roots and complex numbers. None of them have done a good job of explaining the notion of multiple roots, but this is obviously very important. Thoughts? (2) How do I get my name and the date this was made to appear after I post in the discussion section of an article?
