Talk:Hadamard (disambiguation)

Dispute
Sadly, there appears to be a dispute regarding the content of this disambiguation page. As a reminder, when there is a dispute, per WP:DR, the disagreement should be taken to the talkpage here, and not simply extended through edit summaries and reverts. --Elonka 16:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Summaries
I am not aware of a source showing that Hadamard three-circle theorem implies the Hadamard three-lines theorem, nor is this mentioned in any of the wikipedia articles. Both are log-convexity results, but that is too hard to formulate in a summary.

The disambiguation page should briefly describe articles, without confusing the reader. Adding supplementary "editorializing" remarks not already contained in articles on wikipedia does not seem like a very good idea.

My own recommendation is not to spend undue time on this disambiguation page, since it's just a rough pointer to other articles. Instead I see two better ways of improving mathematical content on wikipedia:


 * Add new articles on Hadamard's work (e.g. on PDEs and dynamical systems)
 * Find existing articles which mention specific significant results of Hadamard and create redirect pages to them so they can be added here

That is more or less what I have been doing up to now, following Elonka's request. However, in RL I am quite busy at the moment, as I am in the midst of preparing material for a graduate course that starts next week (Lent term). I made the bulk of my edits here as a favour to Elonka. Mathsci (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A straightforward mapping from the annulus to the strip should prove equivalence; but I have suggested a comporomise wording. I have more interesting things to do than this. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:15, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The closure of the strip is non-compact, while the closure of the annulus is compact. The interior of one is contractible; the interior of the other is not simply connected. In simple terms, the strip is the universal covering space of the annulus. So it's unclear what you might have in mind. There are more advanced theorems which subsume both results, but that is not at issue here. As Elonka wrote, the point about disambiguation pages is to provide quick and readable pointers to articles that readers might be looking for. Any detail beyond that should go into the articles themselves, if properly sourced. Mathsci (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * See compactification. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Compactness is not the main issue here, but the problem of covering maps. I don't quite understand why you are entering into this kind of discussion on the talk page of a disambiguation page. Whatever point you're trying to make, it does not seem to be related to editing this encyclopedia. Please sort this out in private, not on wikipedia. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2011 (UTC)