Talk:Toothpaste tube theory

Suggesting improvements
I think this article is probably notable but it is propped up by some slightly weak sourcing. The link to a wiki page would be better replaced by a link to the case/book (I'm not a lawyer, so it's not clear to me which it is) which it refers to in the first place. A better source for the Byrnes case is at Rominger Legal, or better yet the ruling direct.

There's an interesting other view on toothpaste theory here and a mention of it in the community here. How it relates to derivatives and there are other books that mention it: Google book search has a good link to a paragraph in a book.

With these sources this would be a much fuller, and better sourced, article, good luck. Bigger digger (talk) 21:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The image
The toothpaste image does not have borders or a caption, so it kind of looks like it's being squeezed all over the article :D EmperorFishFinger (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

is that a joke?
Toothpaste tube theory? Really? A serious theory, like in Einstein's theory of time and space relativity? Or is this entire Wikipedia article a joke? 93.219.183.49 (talk) 11:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I’m no expert, but it seems ridiculously facile to me - cause leads to effect, end of? Or am I missing something? 2A00:23C6:B80F:9501:8177:A98F:C300:1BA5 (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC)