| Revision as of 20:09, 28 April 2013 editDeltahedron (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers7,714 edits That seems an odd reason. "Hurwitz algebra" is ''synonymous'' with "composition algebra"← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:36, 28 April 2013 edit undoMathsci (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers66,107 edits →Redirect to Composition algebraNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| :I am aware of that article and aware that is inadequate. If it were rewritten to have some reasonable content, then it might be OK. In this case a number of articles related to Jordan algebras have been produced. Many, perhaps most, are superficial, with inadequate content or sets of references. I made the decision to place the new content in ] (and elsewhere in ]). It is fairly complete and taken principally from 4 or 5 major sources. (Some of the material/reference are merged from another article.) As an application, it contains a complete proof of the construction of the ] for the octonions, i.e. the exceptional Jordan algebra. It contains 3 proofs of the 1, 2, 4, 8 theorem. The material was needed in this form so that it could be used for ]s and ]s, one of the main applications (due to ] and his school). ] (]) 19:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | :I am aware of that article and aware that is inadequate. If it were rewritten to have some reasonable content, then it might be OK. In this case a number of articles related to Jordan algebras have been produced. Many, perhaps most, are superficial, with inadequate content or sets of references. I made the decision to place the new content in ] (and elsewhere in ]). It is fairly complete and taken principally from 4 or 5 major sources. (Some of the material/reference are merged from another article.) As an application, it contains a complete proof of the construction of the ] for the octonions, i.e. the exceptional Jordan algebra. It contains 3 proofs of the 1, 2, 4, 8 theorem. The material was needed in this form so that it could be used for ]s and ]s, one of the main applications (due to ] and his school). ] (]) 19:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::That seems an odd reason. "Hurwitz algebra" is ''synonymous'' with "composition algebra": although some authors distinguish them by requiring that Hurwitz algebras be unital but not composition algebras. Not to redirect a title to the synonymous topic seems wrong. As to whether the article ] is adequate or not, that is another issue. I have been looking at it again recently, but it would be more helpful to say what you think might be wrong with it at ], not here, and in some detail please (in particular why you think it has "no content" when it plainly does). It may be worth noting that decisions are made by ] not by individuals. ] (]) 20:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | ::That seems an odd reason. "Hurwitz algebra" is ''synonymous'' with "composition algebra": although some authors distinguish them by requiring that Hurwitz algebras be unital but not composition algebras. Not to redirect a title to the synonymous topic seems wrong. As to whether the article ] is adequate or not, that is another issue. I have been looking at it again recently, but it would be more helpful to say what you think might be wrong with it at ], not here, and in some detail please (in particular why you think it has "no content" when it plainly does). It may be worth noting that decisions are made by ] not by individuals. ] (]) 20:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :::There is no content in the ] article. I am one of the more experienced mathematical editors and had the proble, of having properly written content on Jordan algebras. In ]s some attempt at adding content had been made. But the lede actually stated no conditions on the norm, i.e. that it should come from an inner product. The current article has a complete proof of the classification of Euclidean Jordan algebras and two proofs, which I regard as essentially equivalent, due to Eckmann and Chevalley. In this case I have a large amount of mathematiclal on wikipedia, including long articles on harmonic analysis on semisimple Lie groups (the ], ], ]). Faced with the problem if horrendously written articles, the only choice is to use a good sources (Faraut and Koranyi, for example) and summarise from the beginning. This redirect did not exist until I created it, did it? I don't believe that experts in Jordan algebras used the word "normed division algebra". Koecher didn't, Loos didn't, etc. So there's no upsetting of consensus, just new encyclopedic content to wikipedia. For goodness sake, writing ] took over one thousand edits. I think the 40 or so articles on Teichmüller theory and univalent functions also took a lot of time. The material did not exist before that. My advice is to wait until I have finished adding the content on Jordan algebras. For me a problem was how to break up the material into segments or make it simple. I think I have solved that, but it will take a while to finish creating the content. ] is also related to this circle of articles. From what I can tell, hardly any content has been added about this for aeons. So as I say wait until the Jordan algebra articles are written. When that's happened there can be remerges or renamings, but while a large amount of content is being written the priority must be on article creation not on particular titles. I looked recently at ], and could see gaping holes in the description of his mathematics. That happens with almost all mathematical articles I look at. I have not quite decided how I will write the content about semisimple or simple complex Jordan algebras. ] took enough time. ] also. And improving ] is still happening. The ]s are usually complicated to explain, but for Hermitian symmetric spaces of tube type the theory becomes crystal clear using Jordan algebras. for me this is a long process (like creating ], but less multimedia). So in two weeks say when more is written, it should be clearer how to rename or how to rejig things. Without the content, it's impossible. If somebody wants to write an article on ]s in characteristic two or any characteristic, they are welcome. At the moment it's not even possible to find what a ] is on wikipedia. ] (]) 20:36, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:36, 28 April 2013
Redirect to Composition algebra
I have changed the redirect as there was already an article on this topic. Deltahedron (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- I am aware of that article and aware that is inadequate. If it were rewritten to have some reasonable content, then it might be OK. In this case a number of articles related to Jordan algebras have been produced. Many, perhaps most, are superficial, with inadequate content or sets of references. I made the decision to place the new content in Hurwitz's theorem (composition algebras) (and elsewhere in Symmetric cone). It is fairly complete and taken principally from 4 or 5 major sources. (Some of the material/reference are merged from another article.) As an application, it contains a complete proof of the construction of the Albert algebra for the octonions, i.e. the exceptional Jordan algebra. It contains 3 proofs of the 1, 2, 4, 8 theorem. The material was needed in this form so that it could be used for Hermitian symmetric spaces and bounded symmetric domains, one of the main applications (due to Max Koecher and his school). Mathsci (talk) 19:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- That seems an odd reason. "Hurwitz algebra" is synonymous with "composition algebra": although some authors distinguish them by requiring that Hurwitz algebras be unital but not composition algebras. Not to redirect a title to the synonymous topic seems wrong. As to whether the article Composition algebra is adequate or not, that is another issue. I have been looking at it again recently, but it would be more helpful to say what you think might be wrong with it at Talk:Composition algebra, not here, and in some detail please (in particular why you think it has "no content" when it plainly does). It may be worth noting that decisions are made by Misplaced Pages:Consensus not by individuals. Deltahedron (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- There is no content in the Composition algebra article. I am one of the more experienced mathematical editors and had the proble, of having properly written content on Jordan algebras. In normed division algebras some attempt at adding content had been made. But the lede actually stated no conditions on the norm, i.e. that it should come from an inner product. The current article has a complete proof of the classification of Euclidean Jordan algebras and two proofs, which I regard as essentially equivalent, due to Eckmann and Chevalley. In this case I have a large amount of mathematiclal on wikipedia, including long articles on harmonic analysis on semisimple Lie groups (the Plancherel theorem for spherical functions, Zonal spherical function, Oscillator representation). Faced with the problem if horrendously written articles, the only choice is to use a good sources (Faraut and Koranyi, for example) and summarise from the beginning. This redirect did not exist until I created it, did it? I don't believe that experts in Jordan algebras used the word "normed division algebra". Koecher didn't, Loos didn't, etc. So there's no upsetting of consensus, just new encyclopedic content to wikipedia. For goodness sake, writing Differential geometry of surfaces took over one thousand edits. I think the 40 or so articles on Teichmüller theory and univalent functions also took a lot of time. The material did not exist before that. My advice is to wait until I have finished adding the content on Jordan algebras. For me a problem was how to break up the material into segments or make it simple. I think I have solved that, but it will take a while to finish creating the content. Invariant convex cone is also related to this circle of articles. From what I can tell, hardly any content has been added about this for aeons. So as I say wait until the Jordan algebra articles are written. When that's happened there can be remerges or renamings, but while a large amount of content is being written the priority must be on article creation not on particular titles. I looked recently at Hans Freudenthal, and could see gaping holes in the description of his mathematics. That happens with almost all mathematical articles I look at. I have not quite decided how I will write the content about semisimple or simple complex Jordan algebras. Complexification (Lie group) took enough time. Borel–de Siebenthal theory also. And improving Hermitian symmetric space is still happening. The restricted root systems are usually complicated to explain, but for Hermitian symmetric spaces of tube type the theory becomes crystal clear using Jordan algebras. for me this is a long process (like creating Orgelbüchlein, but less multimedia). So in two weeks say when more is written, it should be clearer how to rename or how to rejig things. Without the content, it's impossible. If somebody wants to write an article on quadratic Jordan algebras in characteristic two or any characteristic, they are welcome. At the moment it's not even possible to find what a quadratic Jordan algebra is on wikipedia. Mathsci (talk) 20:36, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- That seems an odd reason. "Hurwitz algebra" is synonymous with "composition algebra": although some authors distinguish them by requiring that Hurwitz algebras be unital but not composition algebras. Not to redirect a title to the synonymous topic seems wrong. As to whether the article Composition algebra is adequate or not, that is another issue. I have been looking at it again recently, but it would be more helpful to say what you think might be wrong with it at Talk:Composition algebra, not here, and in some detail please (in particular why you think it has "no content" when it plainly does). It may be worth noting that decisions are made by Misplaced Pages:Consensus not by individuals. Deltahedron (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)