Talk:Zero sharp

There is a symbol for the sharp sign in unicode: ♯

I am unsure how wise it might be to convert this page to use this character instead of a superscript # (octothorpe)

Not everyone can see Unicode characters. This is why we do not use Unicode unless absolutely necessary. Dysprosia 07:27, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

More relevantly these days, Solovay's article calls this set "O^#", where the # sign has horizontal and diagonal bars. Contrast with the musical ♯ sign, which has diagonal and vertical bars. LegionMammal978 (talk) 23:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The canonical way"

Which way is the canonical? --84.229.190.204 (talk) 04:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, or really, good catch. Strictly speaking there is no single canonical way — there are lots of inessentially different codings. Should be reworded; not going to tackle it right now. Feel free to take a crack at it if you like. --Trovatore (talk) 06:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prescience

It was introduced by Solovay (1967), based on the ideas in Silver (1971). I'm impressed, but perhaps that does not read quite as intended. Charles Matthews (talk) 11:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indescernibles

I think we mean order-indescernibles. Perhaps at least the first reference could be changed? (173.206.238.58 (talk) 08:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Good point — I added a parenthetical. Maybe there's a lovelier solution available, but this at least addresses the issue. --Trovatore (talk) 09:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]