User talk:Chinju

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello there Chinju, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

---

Instead of making and editing Test Page, edit the Wikipedia:Sandbox -- it should serve your needs, and it is obviously not an article. If you need to test more complex things that require multiple pages or something, go to http://test.wikipedia.org/ and edit away. If I misunderstood what you were trying to do, tell me or just ignore this. Thanks! Paullusmagnus 19:18, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Contents 1 General number field sieve 2 The Humungous Image Tagging Project 3 Article Licensing 4 Req. for your work on Sony v Universal 5 Practising 6 Direct sum of modules 7 Remark 8 User talk:Arbitrary username 9 Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can 10 Random Act of Kindness Barnstar 11 Causality

[edit] General number field sieve

Regarding your edits to general number field sieve: I'm afraid you're mistaken. On MathWorld, it doesn't say that n is the number of bits in the number to be factored. In fact, when talking about factoring, n is by convention the number to be factored. Anyway, in factoring, it's unusual to specify the size of numbers in bits (except with, for example, RSA keys), since decimal digits are a more intuitive measure of number size to us humans. Decrypt3 15:59, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

OK, now I agree with the change. I hadn't spotted the n and logn difference, since in every source I've seen apart from Wikipedia it's logn, and I wasn't expecting it to be different. I think it's better this way - like I said, it is conventional to use n as the number to be factored in factoring discussions, so this keeps with the convention. Sorry for the confusion! Decrypt3 00:07, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Req. for your work on Sony v Universal

I think Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios could make a great featured article. It doesn't quite meet the requirements yet, but it could with a little work. In light of the debates and cases about digital piracy and the obligations of hardware/software creators, the affirmation/modification/elimination of the Sony precedent is a key issue for the future of information technology.

Since you've worked on the article in the past, feel free to take another look to bring it "up to code" for a nomination. Feco 21:07, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Practising

I did not make that edit which you question, but Merriam-Webster on line allows both spellings. There may be some difference in British vs American usage, but from my best recollection (mostly U.S.) the spelling with the "cing" is used more for practicing music, tennis, mathematics, and so on - part of a learning or development process, while I believe for the concept of following precepts, as in religion or moral code, I have seen the "sing" more often. For a profession, such as being a doctor actually in service, however, I think I have seen the "c" more. Maybe we are both "practising pedants." Pdn 03:56, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Direct sum of modules

I agree with you that, strictly speaking, one does not have to define integral scalar multiple to define the direct sum of abelian groups. So, I left this out of the definition. However, I reverted everything else back to read "abelian group" and inserted a remark regarding integral scalar multiplication.

The whole purpose of the article is to describe direct sum constructions of certain modules. In other words, to describe various coproducts in certain categories of modules. The reason to include abelian groups specifically, is that the direct sum construction is only a coproduct in the category of abelian groups, but not in the category of groups. The reason to include the 2 cases of vector spaces and abelian groups is that each of these is a special case of a category of modules over a ring (with vector spaces, it is a field; with abelian groups, it is the integers). This is why it is important to mention the integral scalar multiplication.

Even in the category of finite groups, the direct sum (coproduct) construction is not the direct sum as described in this article, it is the free product. Revolver 01:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Remark

Hi Chinju. Thank you for your change to Independence (mathematics). The article looks better now. And one request. It would be really nice if you put edit summaries when you contribute. This is one of those things which make it easier for other people when they check the watchlist and for editors checking recent changes. Think of it as of the "Subject:" line in an email. Thanks a lot, Oleg Alexandrov 03:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Arbitrary username

please check updated message there - thank you kindly for your concern. 83.145.108.71 21:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

[edit] Random Act of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I noticed the message you left on Arbitrary username's talk page. That was really, really kind and thoughtful. Wikipedia needs more people like you. Thank you. --Jatkins 17:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Causality

Hello,

I was planning to make changes to the special relativity article on this point some time ago. I agree with you that one cannot say that a violation of causality is a logical paradox. But if one can send signals using tachyons, one can create a so-called "anti-telephone", i.e. you can send a signal to yourself in the past. This can be used to construct paadoxes, however, it is then still possible to conjecture that you can only have consistent solutions. In this article some details are given.

Anyway, it would be interesting to give some more details in the article, like how the faster than light signals should be sent in order to send a signal into one's own past than just say that there are observers that see the order of events reversed. Count Iblis 02:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)