Talk:N-cube

The existing n-cube page describes something that I, as a working mathematician who often uses the n-cube, never heard of. This content is wrong. Also, the name "measure polytope" is completely new to me. The common names for the so-called "measure polytope" are "hypercube" (if no dimension is specified) and "n-cube" (if the dimension is specified). I suggest the best article title is "hypercube", second best is "n-cube". The present content of the n-cube article perhaps should be an alternative meaning in some specialized corner of mathematics. Zaslav 17:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this should redirect to the same article as measure polytope, and I agree that hypercube would be a better choice for the preferred article title. I don't see any content in the article as it is now that is worth merging into the hypercube article, though. Perhaps there is enough research in combinatorial number theory on sets of the form described here to warrant an article, but if so it needs to be documented by appropriate citations and it should be called something like n-cube (number theory) to avoid confusing people looking for information on geometric hypercubes. —David Eppstein 18:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes! I intended to suggest that the current article "n-cube" be moved to something else, since it has little or nothing to do with the n-cube as usually understood, and that "n-cube" link to hypercube or be a disambiguation page. n-cube (number theory) sounds fine to me, but I would be happier if an experienced number theorist would verify that this is a standard term rather than a two-time invention. Zaslav 01:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would suggest we move this discussion to Talk:Measure polytope as that is the larger article.--agr 03:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Re the number-theoretic content: I tried doing some searches on MathSciNet and Google Scholar but didn't turn anything up, possibly due to too much noise from the geometric definitions of cubes and hypercubes. Generalized arithmetic progression is itself not too popular — enough to be worth a WP article in my opinion, but on the low end — and this seems a specialized subtopic of that, so in the absense of references I'm tempted to just dump the content and let whoever created it recreate it if it really is notable. —David Eppstein 03:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree - dump this content. Tom Ruen 04:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Will not wait any further... Redirecting to Measure polytope --ANONYMOUS COWARD0xC0DE 00:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The redirect did not work! (nvm) --ANONYMOUS COWARD0xC0DE 00:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)