User talk:Fake Proof

Welcome to ProofWiki! Since you're new, you may want to check out the general help page. It's the best first stop to see how things are done (next to reading proofs, of course!). Please feel free to contribute to whichever area of mathematics interests you, either by adding new proofs, or fixing up existing ones. If you have any questions please feel free to contact one of the administrators, or post your question on the questions page.

Here are some useful pages to help get you started:
 * Community Portal - To see what needs to be done, and keep up to date with the community.
 * Recent Changes - To keep up with what's new, and what's being added.
 * Check out our house style if you are keen on contributing.
 * Main Page talk - This is where most of the main discussions regarding the direction of the site take place. If you have any ideas, please share them!

Cheers! prime mover (talk) 15:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Further welcome
Thank you for your recent contributions. May I congratulate you on your solid grasp of some of the more fiddly details of this website.

I have added your user ID to the "Trusted Users" list. This means you should now have the capability of (among other things) moving, that is renaming, pages. --prime mover (talk) 11:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you. But my knowledge is too superficial to use new abilities often. --Fake Proof (talk) 11:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not "clean up" our redirects
There are reasons for why we do what we do with, for example, Definition:Moment of Discrete Random Variable. Thanks --prime mover (talk) 13:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry. I'll be careful next time. --Fake Proof (talk) 13:22, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Please stop renaming and recontenting pages
Please do not do what you did here: Eigenvalues of Self-Adjoint Operator have Orthogonal Eigenspaces

The point is that Hermitian Operators have Orthogonal Eigenvectors is a valid result.

If you want to add a new page called Eigenvalues of Self-Adjoint Operator have Orthogonal Eigenspaces, and then use that to demonstrate Hermitian Operators have Orthogonal Eigenvectors, then write a new page and write a new proof.

Removing existing proofs to replace them with different proofs is not how it's done on. What we do is to add new proofs.

I will be carefully going through the changes you have made over the last couple of days to make sure no damage has been done, and fixing what I can, but it may not be today because I had other things planned. --prime mover (talk) 07:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it was too early for me to be a trusted user. I know little about the rules here and I need more time to understand the rules. I didn't intend to mess up here, but I admit that edit was wrong. I'm so sorry for my faults. --Fake Proof (talk) 07:56, 25 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Nobody has set about doing something that radical for a while. The basic thing is: the page Hermitian Operators have Orthogonal Eigenvectors stays as it was (with code tidying). Then a Proof 2 can be generated and the necessary refactoring done (please don't do this yourself at this stage), and that proof 2 will effectively be "Hermitian Operator is Self-Adjoint" (with link to proof) and "Self-Adjoint Operator has Orthogonal Eigenvectors", which in turn may utilise the result Eigenvalues of Self-Adjoint Operator have Orthogonal Eigenspaces if that is the direction it goes. --prime mover (talk) 10:17, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

It's all right I see what's happened now. "Hermitian operator" is the same thing as "Self-Adjoint". We will standardise on Hermitian operator as that we use eponyms on by preference. --prime mover (talk) 10:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

eqn template
Please do not delete empty c= parameters on existing eqn templates. They are left in deliberately.

Thanks --prime mover (talk) 06:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I just deleted them because I saw pages without empty parameters, such as Template:Eqn. But I'll not delete next time. --Fake Proof (talk | contribs) 06:56, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Moving Sigma pages
Thank you for your help in moving those Sigma Function pages, but I have been working on the policy of updating the content at the same time as moving them, otherwise I lose track of what needs to be done. In many cases the pages whcih link to them also need to be amended, particularly the number pages themselves, and I have been carefully checking each one as I go.

If you want to involve in this tedious task, please see whether you can also check all pages which link to these pages, in particular updating those pages with an ArithmeticFunctionTable so as to change the "sigma" parameter to "DSF", or these will remain broken.

Thanks in advance --prime mover (talk) 05:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

cleaning up
Your posts are too numerous to thank individually, so I'll put here: thank you for your hard work in helping with the task of upgrading our $\LateX$ for internal consistency. It is genuinely appreciated. --prime mover (talk) 07:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)