Tensor of a quaternion: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:32, 25 March 2009

Revision as of 18:39, 26 March 2009

Line 5:

<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->

{{Expert|date=March 2009}}

In [[mathematics]], some thinkers{{who}} believe there is a relationship between the norm of a [[Classical Hamiltonian quaternions|quaternion]] and the [[tensor]] of a quaternion. Some writers{{who}}<ref>[[Quaternion#Conjugation.2C_the_norm.2C_and_division|modern thinkers, see proper section of main article]]</ref> define the norm of a quaternion as having the same formula as the tensor of a quaternion, while other writers{{who}}<ref>Hamilton, Tait, Cayley</ref> define the norm of a quaternion as the square of the tensor. Hamilton uses the term tensor in two different sences as a [[Classical_Hamiltonian_quaternions#Tensor|positive numerical quantity]] and as an operator that operates on other mathematical entities extracting a tensor quantity from them.

Hamilton did not, as now claimed, ''define'' a tensor to be "a signless number"; what he actually says is: