User talk:Dfeuer/Double Induction Principle/Naturals

I really really really really really would rather we did not discuss "naturals". A "natural" in English is a simpleton. Particularly in titles it's "Natural Number". And please don't poormouth me that your fingers are too weak and feeble and riddled with osteoporosis to have the energy to type something as tediously long as "Natural Number".

I know that was so in Elizabethan English. It is not true in modern American English, where the common meaning is a person naturally talented at something specific, often a sport. In mathematical jargon a natural is a natural number, a rational is a rational number, and a real is a real number. --Dfeuer (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

We try not to use jargon any more than is necessary. So (at least in titles) it's "natural numbers". (Awaits 16 tons of wet pitchblende to come pouring down onto my head, along with Nelson Dfeuer Muntz sneering "Haa-ha! What about Surjection and Injection, then?") --prime mover (talk) 23:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed jargon is all over titles. I would go so far as to say that the vast majority of page titles here contain jargon. "mapping", "relation", "group", "ring", "field", "identity", "integral", "derivative", "limit", "cosine", "set", "well-founded", etc. I don't see how avoiding jargon in titles is even a valid goal. --Dfeuer (talk) 23:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

In this case, however, we are going to go with "Natural Numbers". --prime mover (talk) 09:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Have you thought of dictating your work to save you the effort of typing? --prime mover (talk) 22:43, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Huh? Dictation software (even if I had any) would not be suitable for this job, and I don't have a secretary. --Dfeuer (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)