Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'
From: Robin Chapman (rjc_at_ivorynospamtower.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: 06/15/04
- Next message: Herman Jurjus: "Re: Collatz conjecture"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: Argument of convolution with sinc()"
- In reply to: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Next in thread: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Reply: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:09:19 +0100
Michael N. Christoff wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the replies. I've come into contact with the real/complex
> definition of analytic while learning the rudiments of generating
> functions. However, intuitively, I've always thought of an analytic
> function as one
> that can be solved symbolically.
Category mistake: functions are not things that "can be solved".
Anyway, this shows that what you "intuitively" have "always thought"
does not correspond to the general usage of the term amongst
mathematicians.
-- Robin Chapman, www.maths.ex.ac.uk/~rjc/rjc.html "Lacan, Jacques, 79, 91-92; mistakes his penis for a square root, 88-9" Francis Wheen, _How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World_
- Next message: Herman Jurjus: "Re: Collatz conjecture"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: Argument of convolution with sinc()"
- In reply to: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Next in thread: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Reply: Michael N. Christoff: "Re: The Definition of 'Analytic Function'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|