The discussion revolves around the formatting and notation used in a written piece about complex numbers, specifically addressing the use of logarithmic functions and terminology. Participants express concerns and suggestions regarding the consistency of notation and the accuracy of terms used in the context of complex analysis.
Participants do not reach a consensus on the preferred notation for logarithms, as there are competing views on whether "log" or "ln" is more appropriate in the context of complex numbers. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the typographical corrections and the implications of regional conventions.
The discussion highlights varying conventions in mathematical notation and the potential for misunderstandings based on regional practices. There are also unresolved aspects regarding the editing process and the timing of feedback.
If Greg restores ability to edit, I am willing to do this within all latex brackets. Where I just refer to log as text, I would rather not, but could be persuaded.dextercioby said:Hi, I know you worked a lot to write it, but can you at least replace log with \log everywhere, or ideally with \ln? Thank you!
Isn't the complex logarithm traditionally denoted ##\log##, not ##\ln##?dextercioby said:Hi, I know you worked a lot to write it, but can you at least replace log with \log everywhere, or ideally with \ln? Thank you!
I noticed in a couple of places you used principle where you meant principal.PAllen said:I'll wait to see if any other requests for improvement come in, so I can do all at once.
Thanks!vela said:Isn't the complex logarithm traditionally denoted ##\log##, not ##\ln##?
I noticed in a couple of places you used principle where you meant principal.
It depends on what you consider "tradition". The official use in the US (which is not my country, btw) is the NIST one:vela said:Isn't the complex logarithm traditionally denoted ##\log##, not ##\ln##?
I noticed in a couple of places you used principle where you meant principal.