Timeline for Has mathoverflow yet led to mathematical breakthroughs? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2019 at 21:43 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | It seems that meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/617/… has taken over the role once served by the current question. | |
| Sep 11, 2013 at 13:04 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Sep 11, 2013 at 13:06 | |||||
| May 14, 2012 at 7:21 | comment | added | Kerry | I was confused as well. Maybe my "breakthrough" is too trivial to be put in here... | |
| May 14, 2012 at 5:15 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Closed as no longer relevant? Does this mean MathOverflow has stopped leading to mathematical breakthroughs? Anyone care to explain? | |
| May 14, 2012 at 3:03 | history | closed |
Felipe Voloch Henry Cohn Benjamin Steinberg Andy Putman Qiaochu Yuan |
no longer relevant | |
| May 14, 2012 at 1:02 | answer | added | Kerry | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 21, 2012 at 19:46 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | On the other side of the coin, how much time overall is spent procrastinating on MO rather than doing "real" research work? The two contributions might well have equal magnitude and elide each other. :) | |
| Mar 21, 2012 at 18:28 | answer | added | Ian Agol | timeline score: 25 | |
| Mar 31, 2011 at 4:00 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by S. Carnahan♦ | ||
| Mar 30, 2011 at 17:45 | answer | added | Gil Kalai | timeline score: 15 | |
| Apr 5, 2010 at 6:23 | answer | added | Douglas S. Stones | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 22:11 | comment | added | Tom LaGatta | All users of MathOverflow read MathOverflow; a small minority reads meta as well. Any question of interest to a wide class of mathematicians (such as this one) has a right to be posted here. | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 21:38 | answer | added | Kim Morrison | timeline score: 19 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 17:06 | answer | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 17:04 | comment | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | Oh, my intuition is that this is the type of question that, if it is going to be here rather than on the Meta, should be community wiki. But I'm not really sure what the aesthetic is for that. | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 17:02 | comment | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | Although I agree that this is probably better for the Meta (there have been related discussions there), I do think this is a great, question. | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 15:07 | answer | added | Steve Huntsman | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 13:55 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | This question is both about math and about MO unlike a typical meta item. You can compare it to the question: "Have blogs led to mathematical breaktroughs" which is unsuitable to meta, but is suitable as a soft mathoverflow question. (I prefer questions in mathematics over questions about mathematics' infrastructure but the later can be useful too.) Regarding the question itself, we can compare MO to email or Tex. WISELY used it can free time for whatever leads to breakthroughs. Finally, I prefer the term "advances" or "substantial advances" rather than "breakthroughs". | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 13:45 | comment | added | gowers | Apologies if I have asked the question in the wrong place -- meta isn't where it should be in my consciousness but I'll put it there now. | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 12:04 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | I think this is more appropriate for meta. Mathoverflow is for math, not for posting questions about mathoverflow. The rules may have changed, I don't know, but I'm just letting you know. | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 11:52 | answer | added | David E Speyer | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 11:51 | answer | added | Minhyong Kim | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 11:47 | answer | added | Kevin Buzzard | timeline score: 25 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 11:41 | answer | added | Joel Fine | timeline score: 31 | |
| Jan 15, 2010 at 11:28 | history | asked | gowers | CC BY-SA 2.5 |