Talk:Four color theorem: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Boris Tsirelson
(I did)
imported>Thomas Wright Sulcer
(r)
Line 10: Line 10:


:::Could you forget that WP can be edited by ''everyone''? Anyway, I did. By the way, I see, you did not use your sandbox for preparing it. I wonder, did you write all of it first on your computer, locally? [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 12:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Could you forget that WP can be edited by ''everyone''? Anyway, I did. By the way, I see, you did not use your sandbox for preparing it. I wonder, did you write all of it first on your computer, locally? [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 12:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Yes. My ninth grader mentioned it and I got curious. The Euler theorem checks out. Still, overall, I'm not satisfied that it does an ''adequate'' job of explaining things in the philosophical sense, but I think this CZ version here is the best one out there on the web (that I could find). It needs wikilinks but I'm less familiar with what other math articles CZ has. I'll be adding diagrams to get the idea across clearer.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:59, 19 April 2010

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition (A famous mathematical statement with a long history) For every planar graph, four colors suffice to color its vertices in such a way that adjacent vertices have different colors. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Mathematics [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

Created.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 04:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Needs more wikilinks by persons who know which mathematical articles we've got and what they're called. Could use more pictures of diagrams?--Thomas Wright Sulcer 04:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Looks impressing. (I have only a slight idea of this matter.) Boris Tsirelson 06:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
You could also add an external link from WP to here (as I did for "plane" for instance); it does not add google juice, but can add readers. Boris Tsirelson 06:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Boris!!! I no longer have a Wikipedia account but feel free to add the link from WP. The two equations are from WP and some of the proof-logic from WP is here, rewritten, but other than that I'd say it's 90% new.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 11:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you forget that WP can be edited by everyone? Anyway, I did. By the way, I see, you did not use your sandbox for preparing it. I wonder, did you write all of it first on your computer, locally? Boris Tsirelson 12:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes. My ninth grader mentioned it and I got curious. The Euler theorem checks out. Still, overall, I'm not satisfied that it does an adequate job of explaining things in the philosophical sense, but I think this CZ version here is the best one out there on the web (that I could find). It needs wikilinks but I'm less familiar with what other math articles CZ has. I'll be adding diagrams to get the idea across clearer.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 12:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)