Talk:Rotation number

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

‹See TfM›

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Systems Mid‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the field of Dynamical systems.

Does it really makes sense?

Does it really make sense to define the rotation number for a map that is not on the circle?--Pokipsy76 (talk) 10:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's supposed to be a generalization of the more traditional idea of rotation number for a circle. See [1] for example. VectorPosse (talk) 20:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the concept can be generalized but the formula in the article:

\omega (x)=\lim _{n\to \infty }{\frac {f^{n}(x)-x}{n}}.

is incorrect for the definition of the rotation number on the torus.--Pokipsy76 (talk) 16:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what it was supposed to be in general, but for a circle, the only case I am familiar with, the definition was completely wrong; I've replaced it with the standard one. Arcfrk (talk) 07:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

intro

Hi. Here is a intro : In mathematics, the rotation number is an invariant of homeomorphisms of the circle." Isn't it to technical ? May better : "it is a number which describes property of transformnation" ? ( or smth like that ) --Adam majewski (talk) 10:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]