Difference between revisions of "Talk:Line integral"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(The sentence ''A '''line integral''' is the area under a function along a specified curve.'' is still wrong, IMHO. ~~~~) |
(Good faith, substantive edits have never been a problem on this site.) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
The sentence ''A '''line integral''' is the area under a function along a specified curve.'' is still wrong, IMHO. [[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 12:57, 26 December 2009 (EST) | The sentence ''A '''line integral''' is the area under a function along a specified curve.'' is still wrong, IMHO. [[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 12:57, 26 December 2009 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Good point, let's drop the non-vector definition since this term is almost always used in vector analysis. Also, you're being overly literal in interpreting (criticizing) the rules, a characteristic I've found to be common to [[liberal style]]. Good faith, substantive edits have never been a problem on this site.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:02, 26 December 2009 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 19:02, December 26, 2009
A line integral is the area under a function along a specified curve.
I have to admit that I have great difficulties to align this description with the usual definition of a line integral, i.e., something like
<math>\int_\mathbf{C} \langle \vec{f}(\vec{s}), d\vec{s} \rangle</math>
(I used this notation to stress the scalar product)
FrankC aka ComedyFan 09:16, 26 December 2009 (EST)
- Your point is a good one. Please feel free to make such substantive improvements directly on the content page. I'll build on your point now ... in the content entry.--Andy Schlafly 09:35, 26 December 2009 (EST)
- Scylla: it is never appropriate for an editor to change the additions made by an Administrator
- Charybdis: 90/10
- I was already blocked two times for three days, I tread carefully... FrankC aka ComedyFan
The sentence A line integral is the area under a function along a specified curve. is still wrong, IMHO. FrankC aka ComedyFan 12:57, 26 December 2009 (EST)
- Good point, let's drop the non-vector definition since this term is almost always used in vector analysis. Also, you're being overly literal in interpreting (criticizing) the rules, a characteristic I've found to be common to liberal style. Good faith, substantive edits have never been a problem on this site.--Andy Schlafly 14:02, 26 December 2009 (EST)