Difference between revisions of "Talk:Quadratic reciprocity"
m |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Actually the quadratic residue page is just better. Maybe this one should just redirect. I sort of threw this one together quickly, so it's not that good. What do others think? --[[User:ComplexZeta|ComplexZeta]] 22:05, 12 July 2006 (EDT) | Actually the quadratic residue page is just better. Maybe this one should just redirect. I sort of threw this one together quickly, so it's not that good. What do others think? --[[User:ComplexZeta|ComplexZeta]] 22:05, 12 July 2006 (EDT) | ||
| − | I think you shouldn't bother to cover stuff like "what is the legendre symbol" and so on -- just put a sentence at the beggining saying that you need to understand Quadratic Residues before you understand Quadratic Reciprocity. Then carry on with the content that is specific to reciprocity.--[[User:JBL|JBL]] 09:58, 13 July 2006 (EDT) | + | I think you shouldn't bother to cover stuff like "what is the legendre symbol" and so on -- just put a sentence at the beggining saying that you need to understand Quadratic Residues before you understand Quadratic Reciprocity. Then carry on with the content that is specific to reciprocity (like its proof, for instance).--[[User:JBL|JBL]] 09:58, 13 July 2006 (EDT) |
Latest revision as of 08:59, 13 July 2006
Someone who knows the subject better than I should probably take a look at Quadratic residues and figure out the material should be split between this article and that one. --Dschafer 21:36, 12 July 2006 (EDT)
Actually the quadratic residue page is just better. Maybe this one should just redirect. I sort of threw this one together quickly, so it's not that good. What do others think? --ComplexZeta 22:05, 12 July 2006 (EDT)
I think you shouldn't bother to cover stuff like "what is the legendre symbol" and so on -- just put a sentence at the beggining saying that you need to understand Quadratic Residues before you understand Quadratic Reciprocity. Then carry on with the content that is specific to reciprocity (like its proof, for instance).--JBL 09:58, 13 July 2006 (EDT)
