Timeline for Can repunits be perfect cubes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| May 28, 2013 at 5:30 | vote | accept | Wangt Fei | ||
| May 30, 2013 at 14:24 | |||||
| May 27, 2013 at 23:56 | comment | added | user9072 | @Gerhard Paseman: I fixed (it is hoped) and expanded it. Thanks for pointing out the confusing formulation. | |
| May 27, 2013 at 23:52 | history | edited | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarified and expanded; deleted 3 characters in body
|
| May 27, 2013 at 19:07 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | From my perspective, "such a number" could include either of the expressions in the title of the paper, or the numbers x,n,y, or q referred to in the title. I do not mean to say that your wording is opaque or misleading. I do mean to say that your wording is not bulletproof. Gerhard "Just Trying To Help Protect" Paseman, 2013.05.27 | |
| May 27, 2013 at 18:49 | comment | added | user9072 | I agree that 'such a number' is not a good way to phrase this (though I would also say that it is hard to see for me how anything else but the $R_n$ in the question could be meant), and will change it shortly (I want to use the edit also to include something else, which I do not want to do just now). | |
| May 27, 2013 at 18:40 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | To reduce the chance of misinterpretation, I highly recommend replacing "such a number" by "a nontrivial base 10 repunit"; otherwise someone else might tell you about 343. Gerhard "Fond Of Repunits And Cubes" Paseman, 2013.05.27 | |
| May 27, 2013 at 16:17 | history | answered | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |