Timeline for What is the max of $n$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{a_i}=1$ where $2\le a_1\lt a_2\lt \cdots\lt a_n\le m$?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 10, 2013 at 17:18 | comment | added | Jose Arnaldo Bebita | This MSE post might be related - Although, I am admittedly not an expert on the topic of Egyptian fractions, I feel that it may be the important key to unlock some of the great unsolved puzzles of mathematics, particularly in the field of number theory. | |
| Oct 10, 2013 at 17:15 | comment | added | Jose Arnaldo Bebita | Oops, I apologize - I didn't realize that the question has already been answered with specific references to Egyptian fractions. | |
| Oct 10, 2013 at 17:14 | comment | added | Jose Arnaldo Bebita | @MarkSapir - this is certainly a "research level" question - please refer to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_fraction for more information. =) | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 4:40 | answer | added | Greg Martin | timeline score: 17 | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 4:13 | history | edited | mathlove | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Sep 17, 2013 at 3:33 | history | edited | mathlove | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Sep 16, 2013 at 21:06 | comment | added | Boris Bukh | I agree with @fedja that the question should not have been closed. I also feel that the question with $99$ replaced by $m$ would be more interesting. After all, for $m$ very small the question is trivial; and I cannot tell where the "border of triviality" lies. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 20:14 | answer | added | Gerhard Paseman | timeline score: 4 | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 19:00 | answer | added | Noam D. Elkies | timeline score: 8 | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 18:33 | comment | added | fedja | My opinion is that the good etiquette is that if you see no value in the question for yourself, you just ignore it. If you close something as "having no research value", it means that the question is beneath you and you have a good reason to believe that it is beneath other people here as well (i.e., you can solve it in a few minutes and tell the sketch of a solution in a few lines). I merely do not believe in any other abstract "value" of research or of life, much less in the ability of anybody to evaluate this value at the first glance in non-obvious cases. Voting to reopen :-). | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 18:26 | history | reopened |
Noam D. Elkies Tom Leinster mathlove Dan Petersen fedja |
||
| Sep 16, 2013 at 17:50 | comment | added | Noam D. Elkies | As with many other problems here (and elsewhere in research mathematics), even if the question itself is of only recreational interest, still the analytical and computational techniques can be of wider interest. Voted to reopen. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 16:38 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Sep 16, 2013 at 18:28 | |||||
| Sep 16, 2013 at 16:00 | comment | added | mathlove | @MarkSapir: Many thanks. I'll do so. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:44 | comment | added | user6976 | @mathlove: I think the standard procedure is that you change the question and then announce it on meta, after which the question is usually reopened if the changes are good enough. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:40 | comment | added | mathlove | @MarkSapir: I think you are right. First, I tried the $a_n\le m$ case, but for me it's so hard. So, I took $m=99$ in order to get some hints to solve its generalization. However, the $m=99$ case itself is hard to solve for me. Then, is it possible to change my question now? my god. it's too late. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:38 | history | closed |
user6976 Bill Johnson Felipe Voloch Andrey Rekalo GH from MO |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:28 | comment | added | user6976 | @fedja: Can you see any research value of this question? Certainly it is not explained in the question. It can be made more interesting, but I am not the OP. Thus I voted to close the question. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:22 | comment | added | fedja | Why 4 votes to close in 40 minutes? Can 4 people solve it or write a computer program that solves it in reasonable time already? If so, I feel quite retarded compared to those guys... | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:12 | review | Close votes | |||
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:42 | |||||
| Sep 16, 2013 at 15:02 | comment | added | mathlove | @BorisBukh: Well, no special reason except that $99$ is the max of two-digit numbers. | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 14:58 | comment | added | Boris Bukh | Why the number 99? | |
| Sep 16, 2013 at 14:41 | history | asked | mathlove | CC BY-SA 3.0 |