Re: Regression analysis -- how-to?

korax1214_at_mailandnews.co.uk
Date: 01/10/05

  • Next message: Maarten Wiltink: "Re: Regression analysis -- how-to?" 
    Date: 10 Jan 2005 11:13:28 -0800

    Maarten Wiltink wrote:
    > I tried to trim but failed.
    >
    > The troll has a point that being polar or Carthesian is not a
    > property of the number, but of its notation. Every complex
    > number can be expressed both as (x+i*y) for some x and y,
    > and as r*e^(i*phi) for some r and phi.

    But that doesn't mean that there's "no such thing". As I already said,
    in applied mathematics (especially algorithms) the concrete form of the
    data *is* (all-)important. (Incidentally, I was taught to use "theta"
    rather than "phi" in the above expression, but that's probably just
    another cultural difference; it doesn't mean that either of us are
    "wrong".)

    > Several on-line dictionaries accessible through dictionary.com
    > seem to agree that "twit" _is_ an insult.

    Not in British English, it isn't (I've been speaking and writing that
    dialect for nearly 50 years); maybe you should find a better online
    dictionary. :-) If you do a web/Usenet search (for robert.bak,
    korax1214 or robert@fm) you will find several posts where I call
    *myself* a twit. :-)

    > It would also seem that 0.5 and 0.75 are fractions only in the
    > sense of being between zero and one; they're not in the notation
    > of one integer divided into another.

    But "one integer divided into another" is not a fraction in the general
    sense; it's specifically a *rational* (a.k.a. solidus) fraction.
    According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a fraction generally is
    "any number which is not an integer" (and even that definition may be
    too narrow, since of course the integers can be considered a special
    case of the reals, just as the reals are a subset of the complex
    numbers).

    > As for intelligent replies, I think Tom gave one.
    Well, it's one more than I got from sci.trollheim. :-)

  • Next message: Maarten Wiltink: "Re: Regression analysis -- how-to?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: The Leibniz notation
      ... I'm trying to get a sense about what I'm reading about Leibniz's notation ... fraction in many instances is just a reflectio of the fact that it is ... fact based on the intuition of infinitesimals. ... But it did have meaning to Leibniz. ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: The Leibniz notation
      ... I'm trying to get a sense about what I'm reading about Leibniz's notation ... fraction in many instances is just a reflectio of the fact that it is ... fact based on the intuition of infinitesimals. ... it is purely symbolic manipulation which must ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: It is irrational to put rational and irrational numbers on the same line.
      ... there exists a unique power set for it? ... Do you accept the axiom that for any element of any set, ... The rational reals are the elements that match elements of Q via that mapping. ... each is a fraction with numerator and denominator real. ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: It is irrational to put rational and irrational numbers on the same line.
      ... The rational reals are the elements that match elements of Q via that mapping. ... each is a fraction with numerator and denominator real. ... We are discussing how irrationals are mixed 'on/with' the rationals on ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: JSH: Keep it simple
      ... algebraic integers contain all reals. ... that has decimal places is just a fraction. ... decimals. ... there are an INFINITY of other numbers available with the same number of digits, ...
      (sci.math)