User talk:Fresheneesz: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 21:12, 7 November 2005 editJitse Niesen (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users17,194 edits question about your edit to Binary relation ← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:39, 8 November 2005 edit undoOleg Alexandrov (talk \| contribs)Administrators47,242 edits Cross product Next edit →
Line 21:		Line 21:

	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)		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)

			== ] ==

			You cut a huge chuck off ] and marked that as a minor edit, without giving an ]. That is not good. Please go to ] and explain your change. Thank you, ] (]) 16:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:39, 8 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: ~~~~.

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)

Cross product

You cut a huge chuck off Cross product and marked that as a minor edit, without giving an edit summary. That is not good. Please go to talk:Cross product and explain your change. Thank you, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)