Talk:Infinitesimal transformation

Request for technical explanation

Many people who, with a good explanation, are capable of understanding this concept, do not learn well from mathematical symbols alone. This concept could be illuminated with a visual example, with an explanation showing how certain properties of the diagram relate to the mathematical symbols used. -- Beland 15:16, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of request for citations

Most mathematical facts that are not disputed shouldn't require a reference. For instance, you wouldn't need to reference that 1+1=2. Mathchem271828 13:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not add the "unreferenced" tag you removed. However, in my opinion, anything that you would find called a theorem in a standard book would require a reference. — Tobias Bergemann 14:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look for a wikipedia page that has a wikipedia policy on references to math that isn't in dispute. Mathchem271828 15:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines#Uncontroversial knowledge is probably relevant: "Some statements are uncontroversial and widely known among people familiar with a discipline. ... The verifiability criteria require that such statements be sourced so that in principle anyone can verify them."

I am not asking for inline references for every single statement on the page. However, two or three references to standard books on Lie theory or the like would be nice. —Tobias Bergemann 16:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tobias, every article should have a couple of references to standard books. References are not only to help readers verify the content, but also to allow the reader to learn more about the subject, and to acknowledge the sources that were used to write the article.

Every article should be in a category, per Wikipedia:Categorization. Mathchem271828, why did you remove Category:Multivariate calculus? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 18:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jitse I removed it because multivariable calculus could be considered a prerequisite for understanding this material but not the other way around. If someone is studying multivariable calculus they shouldn't end up in a set of links that will take them to Lie Algebras and whatnot. You shouldn't label everything that employs calculus of many variables as being in the multivariable calculus category. For example there are tons of applications of multivariable calculus that shouldn't be in the category of multivariable calculus. Mathchem271828 05:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lie algebras via dual numbers

It would be helpful if someone could add the approach to Lie algebras via dual numbers, which is the simplest form of a number system containing infinitesimals, and is sufficient for the development of Lie algebras. Tkuvho (talk) 17:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]