Reputation
3,544
Next privilege 5,000 Rep.
Approve tag wiki edits
Badges
1 22 52
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~87k people reached

Feb
2
awarded  Nice Answer
Jan
14
comment Improvement of a bound on divisor distributions from “Divisors” (Hall and Tenenbaum)?
Although the accepted response already leads to Ford's paper, you might also consult the answer to this earlier question: MO 108912
Dec
17
awarded  Necromancer
Dec
12
awarded  Necromancer
Dec
9
comment Sophisticated treatments of topics in school mathematics
Maybe an example is captured by the notion of "simplifying" as discussed in MO 126519?
Dec
1
comment Exact formula for $\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}\frac1{n^2+1}$
WolframAlpha does accurately evaluate this series; however, the value was initially mis-recorded here. (Hence the edit.)
Dec
1
revised Exact formula for $\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}\frac1{n^2+1}$
WolframAlpha correctly evaluates the series; I have fixed its mistranscription.
Nov
29
comment How has “what every mathematician should know” changed?
Related to $\pi$ and its being irrational (as well as the infinitude of the primes): See MO 21367 and the fascinating answer of François G. Dorais.
Nov
18
revised Has the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra been proved using just fixed point theory?
Finally found that Kulpa paper! Many thanks to K. Szumiło.
Nov
12
comment Proofs without words
See also: MESE 220.
Nov
9
comment A different kind of divisor sums
I think your initial recording of the sequence got cut off, since it ends with a $1$ (which won't be the case for any $n > 1$). Also, any prime $p$ will have only divisors $1$ and $p$ hence only sums $2$, $1+p$, and $2p$; in particular, the sequence will record a $3$ at the primes. To this end, I wonder whether considering the sequence for $n$ composite could be helpful? (Though one could similarly argue that $p^2$ a squared prime will only have sums $2$, $1+p$, $1+p^2$, $2p$, $p+p^2$, and $2p^2$, which are distinct, and thus explain the $6$ that arises for your fourth and ninth entries...)
Nov
2
comment Forcing is intuitionistic
Have you checked Kreisel (1961) "Set-theoretic problems suggested by the notion of potential infinity"? As mentioned in MO 124011, Kreisel claimed he had a form of forcing in his interpretation of intuitionism in that paper. (Cf. the historical treatment of forcing by G.H. Moore.)
Oct
13
comment Simple bijection between reals and sets of natural numbers
Do the interleaved blocks really go back to Dedekind? (I first saw this construction in the "Foundations" text by RL Wilder...)
Oct
13
comment Where does the name $NE(X)$ come from?
I googled cone of curves NE(X) "notation" and found: Numerically effective (Considering the effort expended, I don't think this is worth posting as an answer...)
Oct
13
reviewed Approve When are simple foliations strictly simple?
Oct
12
comment How does a mathematician choose on which problem to work?
@quid I do not intend this as a "finalized product" and I hope that, if the edit is seen as unhelpful, then someone [with the requisite reputation] will simply revert it (see: Requests for reopen votes here). Essentially, I agree with (e.g.) Joel / Misha / Alexandre in their comments above, and I thought the example Richard Stanley provided from his own work to be wonderfully informative.
Oct
12
revised How does a mathematician choose on which problem to work?
i have substantially edited this question in response to its being re-closed: I removed some of the more general questions from the body, and tried to focus on the title question. If anyone feels that the change is too great, or otherwise inappropriate, I only ask that you revert the edit.
Oct
12
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
11
comment How does a mathematician choose on which problem to work?
The collection of questions is too broad: the OP begins with How does mathematical research work?; clearly this is too much. But I think the spirit of the question is reasonable, and maybe it would be better if phrased directly at mathematicians: What is a problem [big or small] that you solved or are working on, how did you choose this problem, and why did/do you continue to work on it? Perhaps it is true that mathematicians ("by definition") know how to choose problems [proof: they choose problems]; but knowing (cognitive) differs from articulating how you know (metacognitive).
Oct
11
answered How does a mathematician choose on which problem to work?