Talk:Equation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| WikiProject Mathematics (Rated Start-Class) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
||||||
| Mathematics rating: | Start Class | Top Priority | Field: Basics | |||
| A vital article. | ||||||
|
||||||
| Version 1.0 Editorial Team (Rated Start-Class) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Merging with Left-hand side and right-hand side of an equation
I think that merging these two articles would be beneficial for those who are looking for basic descriptive information on actualy doing these mathematics. I do also think that the 'left hand/right hand' article could be maintained as succinct stand-alone resource for those searching specifiaclly for it. --anon
I vote against but I don't feel very strongly about it. I found my way here by searching Google for "right hand side". (I am writing a paper and I was curious if it is hypenated or not.) Jason Quinn 02:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I vote against. I think that it would be enough to put reciprocal links for these two articles. Dmitry, 9 June 2006.
-
- I also disagree with merging and removed the merge tag. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
LIKE EQUATIOS ALGEBRAIC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.160.129 (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Mentioning the identity symbol
Aren't three horizontal bars often used to distinguish an identiy from an equation? Is this worth mentioning given the discussion of telling the difference between the two?
- I don't see why not, as long as it's clear that a reader can't rely solely on the convention, as many authors (including Wikipedia) don't usually follow it. Melchoir 16:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Solution point redirect?
Solution point irects here, but the article never mentions what a solution point is. I think that it should be mentioned, or the redirect should be removed. Unfortunately, I don't know what a solution point is, so I'm not sure if its notable enough or how much it relates to this article. Anyone have any ideas? cøøkiə Ξ (talk) 23:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] solution of equation
Maybe also look here: Gowers: What is `solved' when one solves an equation? Boris Tsirelson 09:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] expansion/clarification needed
Currently, definitions of both functional equation and differential equation refer to this article. While I understand that many people have only seen algebraic equations, it would nevertheless be useful to explain that they are not the only type of equations considered in mathematics. Arcfrk 15:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
4/3+m/2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.56.135.2 (talk) 15:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Source for picture of first equation
I don't dispute that Robert Recorde came up with the equals sign and therefore the first equation as we know it, but are you sure that what is in the top box is equivalent to what is in the bottom box in the picture? I have a source (Mathematics: From the Birth of Numbers by Jan Gullberg, page 107) that says that this equation in today's notation would be 14x+15=71, whereas the picture shows it to have the square root of x and absolute values of 15 and 71 (although the absolute values are the same when the numbers are positive). Just wondering what the source of this difference is, as it would not be the first error in Gullbergs' book.--Terets (talk) 14:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
