[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wikipedia-l
Subject:    Re: [Wikipedia-l] An idea
From:       Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell () gmail ! com>
Date:       2005-06-08 4:39:02
Message-ID: e692861c050607213917e49d9a () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 6/7/05, Andrew Venier <avenier@venier.net> wrote:
> How does one, in the course of documenting what is known on a topic,
> "accidentally find out something that wasn't known before"?

Eh, it's quite possible, .. for example in making a example for a math
article you might stumble on something somewhat novel, but often in
mathematics we can empirically confirm the truth of something in a way
which doesn't assert POV. So you might say that NOR is less important
in articles about math. ... but at the same time, it's not like
placing something in an article gets people to test the proof, so NOR
is still potentially valuable there because the majority of 'great new
mathematical ideas' are actually wrong. :)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]