Gary
GaryVasco
Posts: 3,352
|
Post by Gary on Sept 6, 2017 23:09:08 GMT
Vasco,
Is there any significance in the switch from $\widetilde{\Omega}(z)$ on p. 366 to $\phi(z)$ on p. 434?
Gary
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 7, 2017 12:22:04 GMT
Gary
I would say that because $\widetilde{\Omega}(z)=[1/\Omega(z)]$ on the pages around 366 that Needham wants to make a complete break with that notation. But it seems to me that it is only a change of notation, the same ideas are behind it.
Vasco
|
|