Misplaced Pages

User talk:Fresheneesz: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:44, 4 November 2005 editOmegatron (talk | contribs)Administrators35,798 edits op amp edits← Previous edit Revision as of 21:12, 7 November 2005 edit undoJitse Niesen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,194 edits question about your edit to Binary relationNext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:


Please see ] {{User:Omegatron/sig}} 01:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC) Please see ] {{User:Omegatron/sig}} 01:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

== Total relations ==

I have my doubt about your to ], in which you change the definition of total relation from "for all ''x'' and ''y'' in ''X'' it holds that ''xRy'' or ''yRx''" to "for all ''x'' and ''y'' in ''X'' it holds that either ''xRy'' or ''yRx'' (but not both)". In my experience, the first definition is more common; in fact, I don't remember ever seeing the second one. Can you provide a reference in which the second definition is used? In any case, the next sentence, which says that "is greater than or equal to" is an example of a total relation, does not make sense after your change. -- ] (]) 21:12, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:12, 7 November 2005

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be bold!
Be bold!



Sam Spade 11:20, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

op amp edits

Please see Talk:Operational_amplifier_applications#Recent_edits_by_Fresheneesz User:Omegatron/sig 01:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Total relations

I have my doubt about your recent edit to Binary relation, in which you change the definition of total relation from "for all x and y in X it holds that xRy or yRx" to "for all x and y in X it holds that either xRy or yRx (but not both)". In my experience, the first definition is more common; in fact, I don't remember ever seeing the second one. Can you provide a reference in which the second definition is used? In any case, the next sentence, which says that "is greater than or equal to" is an example of a total relation, does not make sense after your change. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 21:12, 7 November 2005 (UTC)