Talk:Schrödinger method

Final formula - should show the n-th derivative, I guess. Charles Matthews 16:09, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

The proposal by User:Fermiboson to delete this article said:

It makes no effort to define the problem it wishes to tackle,

But the second paragraph of the article says:

We seek the probability of some event A defined in terms of these order statistics. For example, we might seek the probability that in a certain seven-day period there were at most two days in on which only one phone call was received, given that the number of phone calls during that time was 20.

That is the effort to define the problem. The notations standard in the mathematical theory of probability, and the allegation that "the text contradicts the equations" could bear some specificity. I cannot tell what is meant by that. My source for this is course notes by John Guidi in a course at MIT talk by Gian-Carlo Rota. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Could you point me to the notes in question? I will admit that I proposed the deletion (and the strong wording within) before checking the author, thinking it to be some random 20-edit account. I would have posted to the talk page first had I checked.

With regard to the specific text - the Xis mentioned at the start of the article do not reappear, A is not defined in terms of them, and I forgot what I meant by the text contradicting the equations, but I certainly cannot at all follow the flow of logic. I was on a bit of a hoax patrol spree and was overaggressive with the trigger, so apologies for that, but the article definitely needs rewriting. I would also doubt the notability of the article, since searches on Scholar, JSTOR, etc produced a grand total of zero results. I would be glad to learn more about this, however. Fermiboson (talk) 08:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)