Frivolous theorem of arithmetic on Wikipedia

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the debate regarding the deletion of the "Frivolous Theorem of Arithmetic" entry from Wikipedia. Participants argue about the theorem's perceived lack of usefulness, with some suggesting it should be categorized under humor rather than mathematics. The conversation highlights the subjective nature of "usefulness" in mathematics and the importance of providing meaningful content on Wikipedia pages. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards improving the article rather than deleting it, emphasizing the need for clarity and significance in mathematical discussions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Wikipedia editing processes, specifically the "Votes for Deletion" page.
  • Familiarity with basic mathematical concepts, including the definition of a theorem.
  • Knowledge of asymptotic notation and its implications in mathematics.
  • Awareness of the distinction between mathematical statements and equations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Wikipedia's guidelines on editing and contributing to articles.
  • Explore the concept of asymptotic analysis in mathematics.
  • Learn about the significance of mathematical theorems and their implications.
  • Investigate the role of humor in mathematical discourse and its impact on public perception.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, Wikipedia contributors, and anyone interested in the intersection of mathematics and public knowledge.

  • #31
Icebreaker said:
Are you implying that the theorem is not useful?

No, I think the page is not useful. It could probably be made useful by adding more content. But all it has right now is filler. For example, the "one of the more interesting theorems of mathematics" comment could be replaced by text that actually explains why the theorem is supposed to be interesting.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Yeah yeah I know, some times I take things too seriously, I've edited the front page, please edit anything I've wrote if you can think of something better.
 
  • #33
I remember it being proven by someone "jokingly" a while back on one of the threads. That proof is much more simple, iirc.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
693
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
862