Talk:Chowla numbers: Difference between revisions

m
Line 40:
 
:::Hi Gerard, Maybe the epigraph should be left out. It too could be thought of as something best left to the talk page. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 23:28, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 
:::: Epigraphs are not meant to a discussion point (as I understand its use),   they are to provide a relevant and a different perspective on the subject.   Epigraphs can always be omitted, but they do make a point.   Here are two examples from the books ''Frankenstein'' and ''To Kill a Mockingbird''; in my opinion, the books are better for it.
 
 
Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay / To mould me Man? Did I solicit thee / From darkness to promote me?
— John Milton, ''Paradise Lost'' (in Mary Shelley's ''Frankenstein'')
 
Lawyers, I suppose, were children once.
— Charles Lamb, ''The Old Benchers of the Inner Temple'' (in Harper Lee's ''To Kill a Mockingbird'')
 
(''Dune'' also had some very poignant epigraphs as well.)
 
:::: I have never read responses (or opinions) on the above books on whether or not that those epigraphs should/shouldn't be included in the respective books, or even a discussion on they being appropriate (or not), or even the merits of the quoted texts. &nbsp; We could discuss the merits of Gauss' opinion, but that wasn't the point of the epigraph. &nbsp; When one discusses the book ''Frankenstein'', John Milton's quote is <u>never</u> talked about &nbsp; (well, except for here). &nbsp; I never thought that adding an epigraph would ruffle so many feathers. &nbsp; I had thought that the collegiate reader's minds on Rosetta Code would appreciate a relevant quote. &nbsp; To move the epigraph to the discussion page would surely distract from the Rosetta Code task of chowla numbers. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 00:28, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 
==Large computations==