Timeline for Historical question about MacMahon theorem, Wronski relation etc
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 8, 2012 at 5:58 | comment | added | Alexander Chervov | @Igor I certainly agree with you, that revision is useless. I'll try to find out about Wronski and hopefully add a comments later. | |
| Aug 8, 2012 at 5:55 | vote | accept | Alexander Chervov | ||
| Aug 5, 2012 at 5:03 | comment | added | Igor Pak | I see. Yes, this often happens when same/similar result is being obtained in parallel in different field. MacMahon's contributions were in the 1920s. I stand by my view that no history of MMT and symmetric functions needs revision, but would be interested to learn more about Wronski's work. | |
| Aug 4, 2012 at 11:25 | comment | added | Alexander Chervov | Thank you very much for your kind reply. Macmahon application to Dixon identity is great, but I think the fact itself and proof I mentioned were known to many people without knowledge about Macmahon unfortunately. E.g. the fact is mentioned in "Loop groups" by Pressley Segal as a footnote (may be Russian translation only? ). My master thesis contain this proof and actually more general facts arxiv.org/abs/q-alg/9703017 | |
| Aug 4, 2012 at 10:17 | history | answered | Igor Pak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |