Talk:Mathematical analysis

Basic analysis
Can the article have an alternate heading of Basic Analysis in the Real Analysis Section or some reference to the term Basic Analysis? I searched wikipedia for Basic Analysis and could not find the term. I found this article using Google searches. I think the term Basic Analysis is still in common use and would help searchers and readers if the term Basic Analysis was cross-referenced with the term Real Analysis for example: http://www.jirka.org/ra/realanal.pdf Jcardazzi (talk) 04:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

"Analysis" as a term is more used in Europe, americans prefer to talk about "Calculus". Lbertolotti (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mathematical analysis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060409124718/http://eom.springer.de/default.htm to http://eom.springer.de/default.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Revival!
I've noticed that this article hasn't been maintained for about 4 years. Let's start a conversation about what we should do to this article to update it. Here are my two cents:


 * Perhaps more information should be placed on the foundations of mathematical analysis. Mostly in the realm of how Descartes' and Fermat's contributions lead to the development of infinitesimal calculus in the late 16th century.


 * A section on how mathematical analysis allowed for the blooming of the natural sciences. It seems that natural science really began its evolution with the introduction of mathematical analysis in the early 16th century. In this section, we could discuss how mathematical analysis paved the way for the evolution of physics and chemistry and its contributions to the later industrial revolution and 20th century technological changes. Perhaps in this section, we could also discuss how the new modern form of physics and chemistry transformed the disciplines of astronomy, geology (geoscience), and biology.


 * Also, what about chemistry? Chemistry was certainly touched by mathematical analysis. With the slow introduction of thermodynamics throughout the 16th and 17th century (which was due to physics), it is what caused the chemical revolution. There is no word "chemistry" throughout this entire article.

I will start by making an addition to the article regarding the first point. If you're reading, consider replying to this post and contribute to the article's development. W.C Cross (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Merge
The decision at a lightly-attended AfD was to merge Non-classical analysis into Mathematical analysis. There's some duplication there already and not all the content is mergeworthy. &mdash; Charles Stewart (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I merged the four points I mentioned in the AfD - please feel free to edit/remove as you see fit! Felix QW (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Looks good. I kind of regret that we've lost the pointer to abstract Stone duality. We've not had substantial coverage since Articles for deletion/Abstract Stone duality in 2009. Request by Paul Taylor; maybe I email him and see if his feelings on having a Wikipedia article on the topic have changed. &mdash; Charles Stewart (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Be more clear on Cauchy contribution
You need to be more clear on whether or not Cauchy produced a "modern" mathematical system of analysis, with strict definitions/axioms unlike Newton who differentiated on intuition. VictorPorton (talk) 15:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)