bio  website  

location  Macquarie University  
age  
visits  member for  5 years, 2 months 
seen  3 hours ago  
stats  profile views  10,143 
9h

awarded  Necromancer 
2d

comment 
When has the BorelCantelli heuristic been wrong?
@user, I missed that  but it seems to me that the result you cite depends on the primality of numbers like $2^{9092392}+40291$, and that those numbers have been shown to be probable primes, but have not been proved to be primes. E.g., en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaprime cites this number as a probable prime, but not as a prime. 
2d

comment 
When has the BorelCantelli heuristic been wrong?
The work to decide whether 78557 is the smallest such $n$ continues, seventeenorbust.com 
Apr 14 
comment 
Characterizing Posets by Functions Into Natural Numbers
Bibliographical details: Novotný, Miroslav, Über gewisse Eigenschaften von Kardinaloperationen, Spisy Přírod. Fak. Univ. Brno 1960 1960 465–484, MR0133241 (24 #A3075). 
Apr 14 
revised 
Open problems in Euclidean geometry?
edited tags 
Apr 14 
revised 
Which math paper maximizes the ratio (importance)/(length)?
edited tags 
Apr 13 
revised 
Fundamental Examples
typos 
Apr 13 
revised 
Rediscovery of lost mathematics
edited tags 
Apr 13 
comment 
Equivalence of Polignac to finite Goldbach?
I'm not sure which Dickson and/or HardyLittlewood conjectures have Goldbach as a special case. I don't even see how Schinel's Hypothesis H implies Goldbach. 
Apr 13 
comment 
A question about summation formula involving binomial coefficient
Each of your formulas has both $N$ and $n$ in it. Is that what you mean to write? 
Apr 11 
comment 
Has this strong number theoretic conjecture of Euler been proved, and where could I find such a proof?
Search for "Euler's pentagonal number formula". 
Apr 11 
comment 
Has this strong number theoretic conjecture of Euler been proved, and where could I find such a proof?
I'm pretty sure Euler proved that formula. See math.stackexchange.com/questions/189157/… for some references. 
Apr 10 
comment 
Most interesting mathematics mistake?
@Todd, it certainly isn't easy. To the best of my knowledge, the density of that sequence is still an open question. 
Apr 10 
comment 
Axiom of choice for sets of finite sets
May I suggest, Mathieu, that after you have digested the Truss paper, that you return to post a summary here? 
Apr 10 
comment 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
As I have mentioned (twice!), people in analytic number theory explain what they mean with their choice of notation. 
Apr 10 
comment 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
@Mirko, I think the dynamical system given by the logarithm is not very interesting. I doubt there is a paper in the dynamical systems literature where anyone has used a 4times iterated logarithm. 
Apr 10 
comment 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
@Marc, I think the part of humanity that has a use for logarithmstothebase4 is disjoint from the part of humanity that has a use for $\log\log\log\log x$, so using $\log_4x$ for the latter isn't likely to even come to the attention of anyone who would have expected the former. And, as I mentioned, the convention is to explain the notation immediately upon first using it, so no one will be confused for long. 
Apr 10 
revised 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
added 146 characters in body 
Apr 10 
comment 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
@Andreas, where, other than in research papers on analytic number theory, is one likely to come across $\log\log\log\log x$? 
Apr 10 
comment 
Notation for $\log \log \cdots \log n$?
@Stefan, yes  so whenever it's used for the iterated logarithm, the author(s) carefully explain just what they mean by it (as in the Ford et al. paper). 