> Lagrange, Gauss, Archimedes, Euler, Riemann These guys have caused me an awful lot of headaches in the last couple of years!!! :-)) > E.g. his work on determinate equations. Lagrange had shown how > the roots of such an equation could be extracted by using a second > equation > whose roots were the squares of the differences of the roots of the > original equation. Sturm gave the final solution. But ... this seems > about > as pure mathematical as you can get to me. Surely, anyone who can do that > is a mathematician? Question: is this the kind of stuff one would have to study e.g. in a bachelor business degree? Reason why I ask this: I had a math professor who made us study all these things and I argued that this was a bit "over the top" for business studies. (although it's not a real bachelor, it's called "licence" over here, but in the US it's regarded as a bachelor) I didn't do very well on that exam. > I am overall intrigued -- and a bit surprised -- by your statement that: > 'as a side note -- Fourier was not a mathematician'. I don't think anyone will ever argue with you again on mathematics. :-) Not after reading this mail. :-))) I didn't follow the thread and I'm a bit surprised to see what the question "is analog still better" can do to people! :-))))))) > > > -- Joeri Vankeirsbilck joeri@... Belway Productions - http://www.belway.com List-admin Logic-users/SoundD*ver-users/Logic-TDM
Message
Re: [L-OT] Re: Analog synth is still better
2001-11-08 by Joeri Vankeirsbilck
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.