From Math Images
Revision as of 11:14, 13 July 2010 by Rebecca (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Active Comments

Re-order the description of each way of generating a cardioid

It sounds like the order we decided on when we talked was: 1) a description of the way of generating the cardioid (these will probably have to be a bit longer than they currently are), 2) introduction of the fancy term (evolute, etc. - you probably won't need to make anything a mouse-over given this structure), 3) equations (if and where we want them). (Abram, 7/9)

<fontcolor=purple> I reordered these.

Derive equations for the cardioid

Maybe derive the basic equations for the cardioid, if that interests you. The easiest way is probably to derive the parametric equations for x and y, and then use those equations to show that the polar and cartesian equations also work. (Abram, 7/9)

Refer the reader to images

There are lots of places where it seems like you want the reader to notice things about a picture, or where helps explain text, but you don't explicitly refer the reader to the image (I understand the anchoring of images may come later). (Abram, 7/9)

The microphone section is a little confusing and could be expanded

The microphone section overall could be a bit more clearly written (I trust you to find a way of doing this). One question I have in particular is what shape the microphone itself is, if the "cardioid" doesn't refer to the shape of the microphone itself. Overall, it may help to use a picture to describe in some detail what happens with the microphone. The section could end up being a good twice as long as a result, but it seems worth it. (Abram, 7/9)

It's not much longer, but I do think it's more clear and I've got a new picture.

The Mandelbrot section is a bit confusing

I can come up with specific ideas if you want. (Abram, 7/9)

Yeah, we'll have to talk about this. I spent this morning looking for more information but I can't really find anything. I don't really understand what's on the page right now anyway, I just took it from Wikipedia. Maybe we can go over this?

Remove those awful math terms from the basic description and why it's interesting

Both these sections have words like "evolute", "caustic", etc. They don't bother me, because I know enough math to know that hardly anybody bothers learning what these terms mean, but a non-mathematical reader may get intimidated because they think that they really ought to know these things. (Abram, 7/9)