Talk:Tree of primitive Pythagorean triples

DIAGRAMS

The diagram of the classic tree (Berggren's) is very nice. Perhaps whoever made it could be persuaded to to make a companion diagram of Price's tree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.37.105.107 (talk) 18:42, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Typo in tree

Typo in graphic tree: at bottom, (35, 12, 17) should be (35, 12, 37). Duoduoduo (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to fix this today. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:38, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

generation not included?

a – 2b + 2c, 2a – b + 2c, 2a – 2b + 3c, a + 2b + 2c, 2a + b + 2c, 2a + 2b + 3c, and -a + 2b + 2c, -2a + b + 2c, -2a + 2b + 3c.

This is literally how the tree is generated. This is literally how you generate all primitive pythagorean triples starting from 3, 4, 5. And it is not in the article. Why is this missing? It's ridiculous that it's missing. Merely showing it in the form of matrices is completely weird and unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.28.110.52 (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with you on both points, "weird" and "unnecessary". Neither the matrix form nor the linear transformation form is weird. What's unnecessary, though, is including both forms in this article, because this article is not the right place to teach the meaning of a matrix.—GraemeMcRae^talk 21:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement on deletions of unfinished and undiscussed addition proposals

Please see Wikipedia:Third opinion#Active disagreements. I was trying to find an optimal presentation for the node objects of the two trees. This is not a work added "en passant" / done in the elevator or while waiting at a bus station. I myself was an administrator at various WP's eo:, yi:, ro: and others as well as a godfather at translatewiki.net. It is very, very, very strange that the contributions where deleted without discussions about "Where's the beef?". Regards Gangleri 95.91.248.133 (talk) 22:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As editors on this talk page, as mathematicians and administrators I want to attract your (user:David Eppstein and user:Michael Hardy) attention. Looking at the administrator list at en.WP I found user:Magnus Manske, user:DerHexer and many others with whom I worked on many common projects a couple of years ago. Please let me know your opinion about the deletion without notice / discussion.

Best regards Gangleri alias לערי ריינהארט and testalias i18n

95.91.248.133 (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages are for discussions of how to improve Wikipedia articles based on reliably published sources. The material deleted from this talk page looked like original research to me, and therefore off-topic even for a talk page. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

to David Eppstein and others: Where and how material should be "prepared" so that it can be later finalised for a community discussion? Gangleri 95.91.248.133 (talk) 02:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have sources, then you can use a user sandbox to prepare it. Otherwise we’re not interested.—Jasper Deng (talk) 03:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Parent of node in tree?

The article describes how to find the three children of any node using, say, the first scheme, but can we go the other way? That is, given a child, what is its parent? In particular, if we don't know which of the three child-producing matrices gives this child can we still straightforwardly find its parent? — $Q$ uantling (talk | contribs) 03:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]