h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Thank you for the comments!

>>I'm not sure why it would be so important that a maths entry should be understandable to everyone - it only needs to be understandable to those who would want to read it in the first place and these would have some background.<<

Actually, that is what I meant, that it should be understandable to someone who wants to read it in first place. However, it is very hard to know how much background they have - it could be a, how do you call them, schoolkid who hasn't bumped into complex numbers yet, or some older person who has left uni for 20 years but still likes mathematics for fun - in both cases, I wouldn't require complex numbers to be known a priori.



I changed 'illustrate on' for 'illustrate with' and 'value without a sign' for 'magnitude irrespective of the sign'


'While it seems natural to say that 100 + 400i must be larger than 2 + 3i because it's got more zeros in it...' --> I just changed the values.

'I'd suggest omitting 'of this Entry' - it's not needed.' --> Indeed it isn't, but wouldn't it sound strange?

Entry: Gauss integers - A25022396
Author: toy box - U208464

It's a good entry, Toy Box, but tantalising in that it explains how to manipulate the numbers and then says there are lots of applications which are beyond the scope of the Guide.

The first header "Gauss Integers" is a bit redundant, since that is the title of the Entry. I suggest you remove it and change "Definition" to a header.

Time has come to remember --> The time has come to remember

if two Gauss integers have 'same size' --> if two Gauss integers have the 'same size'

Fermat's Theorem --> Fermat's Last Theorem

You might like to link to the Entry on Diophantine Equations A964956.

>>It's a good entry, Toy Box, but tantalising in that it explains how to manipulate the numbers and then says there are lots of applications which are beyond the scope of the Guide.<<

Actually, the applications I'm aware of involve diophantine equations (how could I miss the Edited Entry about them by the way ) and will look rather the same.

>>Fermat's Theorem --> Fermat's Last Theorem<<

Ah, I don't like that terminology really (it looks too sensationalist to me ), I prefer 'Fermat's Great Theorem'. Still, better use the more common one in this case.

And I made the other changes, too

Any further comments on this one?

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Congratulations!