[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: Ansatz?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg101249] Re: Ansatz?
• From: Vince <blueschi at gmail.com>
• Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:08:06 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <h1nf0q$91h$1@smc.vnet.net> <h1vmau$aj8$1@smc.vnet.net>

On Jun 26, 6:51 am, Roland Franzius <roland.franz... at uos.de> wrote:
> Vince schrieb:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 4:22 am, AES <sieg... at stanford.edu> wrote:
> >> Wolfram MathWorld says:
>
> >>    An ansatz is an assumed form for a mathematical statement
> >>    that is not based on any underlying theory or principle.
>
> >>    SEE ALSO: Conjecture, Hypothesis, Principle, Proposition
>
> >> Somewhere I've picked up the idea that "ansatz" can also be used to
> >> indicate the "form" or the "approach" -- more specifically, something
> >> like the choice of coordinates and variables and equations -- the
> >> "geometry and notation" so to speak -- in which one sets up a problem =
or
> >> a calculation.
>
> >> The "underlying theory or principles" in my interpretation can be
> >> perfectly clear, and no "Conjectures" or "Hypotheses" need be involved=