Talk:Row vector
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|||||
| Mathematics rating: | Start Class | Low Priority | Field: Algebra | ||
| Please update this rating as the article progresses, or if the rating is inaccurate. Please also add comments to suggest improvements to the article. | |||||
[edit] Questionable alternative notation
As I have read the convention to write collumn vector elements separated by commas, then the row vector:
![\mathbf x = \big[ x_1, x_2, \dots, x_n \big].](../../../../math/2/2/4/224d53b6f2f1eac4b64893b6b31b9974.png)
is indeed a column vector. Another mistake is the transposed column vector (used commas), which is called column vector, but it appears to be row vector. I don't change the main text, just I am puzzled. I have never seen this comma/space notation, usually I think that the comma idea is "ugly", because it can slip from one's attention, exacly as is the case with the current Wikipedia entry. The same error is also made on the column vector entry. Danko Georgiev MD 02:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Should simple vectors be distinguished?
Row vectors and Column vectors are rank 2 tensors. Simple vectors would be rank 1 tensors. And yet the discussion of row [and column] vectors doesn't even hint at this distinction -- wikipedia does not seem to have any discussion of the topic anywhere? (We have "coordinate vectors" but no basic discussion of the underlying concept of "vector" as a mathematical concept as distinct from the conventions of physics.)
Where does this discussion belong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.54.131.7 (talk) 15:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
