318:
The first reference says, "to do this, we turn to holistic, pre-rational, and post-rational understandings". "Holistic" is one of those meaningless words that people say to impress, and mathematics is neither pre-rational nor post-rational. And I would also quibble with the word "understandings", as
297:
Can anybody at least add a reference? Maslov's works look rather suspicious, and one cannot rely just on one source, right? A nice funny idea, but if it's an opinion of just one individual, it probably does not make any sense at all, does it? I also looked into the first reference; it's just
246:
The page is extremely misleading and lacks any coherent mathematical content. It refers to obscure (at best!) works by Maslov, of questionable notability (e.g. they're barely cited by anyone but the author himself), and conflates his notion with the completely unrelated notion of
197:
274:
This article appears to be "original synthesis", and doesn't (to me) seem to be encyclopaedic in nature. It appears to be based entirely on a single arxiv paper. See extensive discussion in
191:
369:
158:
131:
126:
135:
118:
105:
90:
275:
390:
356:
212:
179:
422:
279:
239:
85:
78:
17:
173:
466:
449:
428:
396:
362:
328:
312:
287:
60:
57:
169:
99:
95:
260:
122:
219:
483:
40:
114:
66:
385:
351:
308:
53:
416:
324:
283:
479:
185:
36:
228:
PROD contested by IP without explanation or improvement. The rationale, posted on 21 February 2021 by
233:
229:
373:
339:
304:
205:
445:
437:
412:
320:
74:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
478:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
298:
something artistic, new-age musings on elementary topology for kids. It's not math, I think.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
462:
440:. We have never published original research, and after 20 years, everybody knows this.
441:
408:
152:
458:
411:
issues. I'm calling bullshit on this. The main source is an "art project".
319:
there is no indication in that paper that anyone understands anything.
276:
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Negative-dimensional_space
474:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
251:
This is corroborated by similar remarks on the talk page:
148:
144:
140:
204:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
486:). No further edits should be made to this page.
370:list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions
368:Note: This discussion has been included in the
457:Pseudo-mathematics without reliable sources.
244:
218:
8:
106:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
367:
254:
301:In short, the article should be removed.
7:
24:
91:Introduction to deletion process
261:Talk:Negative-dimensional space
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
329:13:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
313:01:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
288:23:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
81:(AfD)? Read these primers!
503:
467:09:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
450:15:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
429:02:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
397:17:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
363:17:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
115:Negative-dimensional space
67:Negative-dimensional space
61:23:15, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
476:Please do not modify it.
293:Does it even make sense?
32:Please do not modify it.
249:
79:Articles for deletion
270:Original synthesis?
399:
336:
335:
96:Guide to deletion
86:How to contribute
494:
425:
419:
393:
388:
359:
354:
255:
223:
222:
208:
156:
138:
76:
34:
502:
501:
497:
496:
495:
493:
492:
491:
490:
484:deletion review
423:
417:
391:
386:
357:
352:
337:
295:
272:
263:
165:
129:
113:
110:
73:
70:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
500:
498:
489:
488:
470:
469:
452:
431:
401:
400:
334:
333:
332:
331:
305:Vlad Patryshev
294:
291:
271:
268:
265:
264:
258:
253:
226:
225:
162:
109:
108:
103:
93:
88:
71:
69:
64:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
499:
487:
485:
481:
477:
472:
471:
468:
464:
460:
456:
453:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
432:
430:
426:
420:
414:
410:
406:
403:
402:
398:
394:
389:
383:
382:
379:
376:
371:
366:
365:
364:
360:
355:
349:
348:
345:
342:
330:
326:
322:
317:
316:
315:
314:
310:
306:
302:
299:
292:
290:
289:
285:
281:
277:
269:
267:
266:
262:
257:
256:
252:
248:
243:
241:
238:
235:
231:
221:
217:
214:
211:
207:
203:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
171:
168:
167:Find sources:
163:
160:
154:
150:
146:
142:
137:
133:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
111:
107:
104:
101:
97:
94:
92:
89:
87:
84:
83:
82:
80:
75:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
475:
473:
454:
438:Power~enwiki
433:
413:power~enwiki
404:
380:
377:
374:
346:
343:
340:
321:Phil Bridger
303:
300:
296:
280:67.198.37.16
273:
250:
245:
236:
227:
215:
209:
201:
194:
188:
182:
176:
166:
72:
49:
47:
31:
28:
192:free images
278:for more.
230:AlexShamov
480:talk page
242:), read:
37:talk page
482:or in a
247:spectra.
240:contribs
159:View log
100:glossary
39:or in a
442:Bearian
375:Laundry
341:Laundry
198:WP refs
186:scholar
132:protect
127:history
77:New to
459:Tercer
455:Delete
434:Delete
405:Delete
170:Google
136:delete
58:(talk)
50:delete
409:WP:OR
378:Pizza
344:Pizza
259:From
213:JSTOR
174:books
153:views
145:watch
141:links
16:<
463:talk
446:talk
436:per
325:talk
309:talk
284:talk
234:talk
206:FENS
180:news
149:logs
123:talk
119:edit
372:. –
220:TWL
157:– (
54:PMC
52:. ♠
465:)
448:)
427:)
421:,
407:-
395:)
392:c̄
381:03
361:)
358:c̄
347:03
327:)
311:)
286:)
200:)
151:|
147:|
143:|
139:|
134:|
130:|
125:|
121:|
56:♠
461:(
444:(
424:ν
418:π
415:(
387:d
384:(
353:d
350:(
338:–
323:(
307:(
282:(
237:·
232:(
224:)
216:·
210:·
202:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
177:·
172:(
164:(
161:)
155:)
117:(
102:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.