Talk:Direct approximation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
: I certainly don't mind the idea of patent interval implying "direct mapping". I mean my "complete consistency" concept from earlier- which I have since renamed "telicity"- hinges on "direct" and "consistent" mappings of intervals in a given prime chain being identical up until the prime chain itself connects with an interval of a lower p-limit prime chain. For this to work, the prime chain must not exceed 50% relative error from the starting point up until its connection with the lower prime chain. Thus, you can be sure that when I finalize this concept of mine, I'll be utilizing this very notion of the patent interval implying direct mapping. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC) | : I certainly don't mind the idea of patent interval implying "direct mapping". I mean my "complete consistency" concept from earlier- which I have since renamed "telicity"- hinges on "direct" and "consistent" mappings of intervals in a given prime chain being identical up until the prime chain itself connects with an interval of a lower p-limit prime chain. For this to work, the prime chain must not exceed 50% relative error from the starting point up until its connection with the lower prime chain. Thus, you can be sure that when I finalize this concept of mine, I'll be utilizing this very notion of the patent interval implying direct mapping. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
== Connection between direct mapping and patent interval == | |||
I don't know about you, but it seems to me that "direct mapping" is the mapping procedure that generates "patent intervals". The way this article is currently worded, it seems to say that the two things are the same, when they're not. Would you mind be trying to fix this to make the relationship more clear? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 23:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC) | |||