Talk:Quaternionic analysis

Mathematics Start‑class Low‑priority

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Question

What is the "R" under the limit symbol in the definition of the Gateaux derivative? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 133.86.80.122 (talk) 02:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The R means that t is restricted to the real line. As the text says, "h shows the direction" in which the derivative is taken; for emphasis the R was included by an editor to limit the range of t.Rgdboer (talk) 23:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming the article to "Quaternionic analysis"

Sometime soon, I hope to rename the article to "Quaternionic analysis". I had considered "quaternion analysis," however google scholar seems to indicate that the former is more highly used. This is an improvement from "quaternion variable" according to the WP naming guidlines for the following reasons:

Recognizability/Naturalness: "quaternion variable" is just a hacked-off version of "function of a quaternion variable," and is not likely to be the phrase people use to search. It does not turn up relevant hits like "quaternionic analysis" does.
Consistency: "complex variable" redirects to complex analysis, and "real variable" redirects to a stub which is basically a redirect to real analysis, so to follow this pattern it would be more sensical to use "quaternionic analysis"

Redirects for "quaternion variable" and "quaternion analysis" would definitely be part of the plan. Feedback welcome. Rschwieb (talk) 15:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The current title can be used in phrases like "differentiation with respect to a quaternion variable", and "quaternion variable domain", as in domain (mathematical analysis). The title you propose is something of a conversation stopper. Reviewing the article mathematical analysis there is the section called Subdivisions. There functional analysis is put on a par with geometric analysis. But textbooks today frequently use Complex Variable in preference to Complex Analysis.

As for the adjective Quaternionic, note that we have quaternion group though references often use ionic for the designation of that group. The longer adjective sounds like ionic bond. The current title refers to variable which connotes the extent of quaternions. This comment may serve to explain why the title was "Quaternion variable", should a Move be made.Rgdboer (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've got no problem with the phrase "a quaternion variable," and it can continue to be used in articles, but I just think it's not a good title for this article.

Judging from googlebook hits, it is very difficult to agree with you that "complex variable" is preferred. It rather looks like a large majority of hits use the phrase "function of a complex variable." I don't dispute that "function(s) of a quaternion variable," is a fine title, but I am pointing out that "function of a complex variable" and "function of a real variable" are both (basically) redirects to complex analysis and real analysis. There is a definite pattern suggested. Rschwieb (talk) 20:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like there isn't any major disagreement (right?). Sometime soon I'll make the move, making sure to make appropriate redirects to preserve the former use of "quaternion variable." I might also expand the lead to make the analogy to functions of real and complex variables a little clearer. I hope this satisfies all parties. Thanks! Rschwieb (talk) 15:54, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend that this article be deleted.

The article is apparently not written by a mathematician, since many statements are not mathematically rigorous and suggest a harmful kind of "original research". For example, the part about extending a function to the quaternions if its real part is even and if its pure quaternion part is odd, does not even define what "extending" the function means. Without any special definition, all such functions can be extended to the quaternions. Shortly after that, an expression involves a variable t, and although the other variables are specified, it is left unspecified whether t is an arbitrary quaternion or is restricted to having real values, or something else. Et cetera.Daqu (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no t in the argument, perhaps it was

f

that you read as t. Check it out, the conditions are necessary for a function of a quaternion variable to be an extension of a complex variable function. — Rgdboer (talk) 22:27, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]