[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

*Subject*: **Re: [office-formula] Groups - OpenDocument Formula Specification2008-12-21 (ODT) (OpenDocument-formula-20081221.odt) uploaded**

*From*:**"Andreas J. Guelzow" <aguelzow@math.concordia.ab.ca>***To*: office-formula@lists.oasis-open.org*Date*: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:05:05 -0700

On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 13:32 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > On Sunday, 2008-12-21 16:32:49 -0700, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote: > > > > - PERMUT() formula corrected. > > > > How is this any more corect than before? What is "P subscript k,n" or > > P(n,k) anyways? > > Isn't that the usual convention to write P(n,k)=n!/(n-k)! for this > probability? > > > SHouldn't that expression be not just deleted? > > Especially if there appears to be an argument about whetehr it is > > "correct" or not. > > Should I better remove P(n,k) and keep the rest? n!/(n-k)! has only one meaning. Whether P(n,k) is the "usual" convention depends on your discipline. I think nPk and the twodimensional binomial with n written above k are at least as common. So removing the P(n,k) and keeping the rest might be a good idea. Andreas

**References**:**Re: [office-formula] Groups - OpenDocument Formula Specification2008-12-21 (ODT) (OpenDocument-formula-20081221.odt) uploaded***From:*Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]