ok, so one more for a(u, v). It's not surprising or you would need to rewrite that book. ;-)
Current results: Anders: ambivalent Garth: neutral, maybe a(u, v) Hans Petter: a(u, v) Kent: a(u, v) Marie: a(v, u) Patrick: a(v, u) Doug: a(u, v) Ridg: a(u, v) -- Anders On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 07:40:26AM -0700, Ridgway Scott wrote: > I am formally ambivalent in the sense that it is just notation and thus > there cannot be any mathematical argument one way or the other. > But I support Doug's analysis: a(u,v) is the way it is commonly used > even though it is backwards with respect to the standard matrix > numbering. So I have to say: why change? So a(u,v) for me. > > Ridg > > On Jun 1, 2010, at 7:14 AM, Anders Logg wrote: > > >Here's a summary of opinions (in order of appearance): > > > > Garth: neutral, maybe a(u, v) > > Hans Petter: a(u, v) > > Kent: a(u, v) > > Marie: a(v, u) > > Patrick: a(v, u) > > Doug: a(u, v) > > > >More thoughts/opinions? > > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
