Fivebee2 (talk) 21:56, June 18, 2018 (UTC) I think we should give this different names like "48 Notation", "PlantStar Notation" or "PlantStar's 48 Notation"
Why can we use this notation?[]
There are many articles including "analyses" by ARsygo based on this notation. But it is obvious that this notation is incomplete and there is no officially written full definition in the source. (No, I am not referring to a rule in your guess.) Therefore the analysis is completely meaningless. Can I delete them all?
p-adic 12:54, April 9, 2020 (UTC)
- Well, I guess that the original user doesn't specify the rules completely. So, can someone leave a message on the talk page? But I guess [2,2] = [1,2304] = [48^2304], but forgot to add another rule to make it defined completely. (ARsygo (talk) 13:38, April 9, 2020 (UTC))
- Could you tell me how you guessed [2,2] = [1,2304]? Is there any explanation by the creator?
- p-adic 13:44, April 9, 2020 (UTC)
- Based on the original rules that is given:
- [n] = 48n
- [1,2] = 482,304
- [1,n] = [48n] = 4848n
- [2,1] = [1,48]
I guess... judging by the pattern, [2,2] is [1,2304]. Can I make my web book to reanalyze this notation to compensate that?
- But there is only single rule on [2,n], and hence it looks too dangerous to guess [2,2] from it... Since your web bool just ensures how you guessed instead of the original intension, it does not work as a source. I will not delete them, but I would like admins to judge it. At least, I recommend you not to add new analyses based on unwritten rules.
- p-adic 14:12, April 9, 2020 (UTC)
TO Nirvana Supermind[]
Stop vandalism. You should not add an unsourced description which you cannot prove. Be responsible for what you write. At least, your statement However, both notations are well-defined for all expresssions except [2,2]. is awfully wrong.
p-adic 10:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)