Timeline for Proof or citation?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2014 at 8:39 | comment | added | Patrick I-Z | Trivial is a very subjective notion. The fact that you argue with yourself on this question means that you need to put a proof, even short. You are writing math to explain things to people, so explain ;-) | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 21:51 | comment | added | Michael | It happened more than once that the same result would get published more than once by the same author in different languages, as long as later publications mention the earlier ones; rumour has it Riesz did that regularly. Some authors published twice because of the contradictory needs for speedy publication for the priority and well-written thoughtful publication for the posterity. I don't think anybody would have a problem with including the proof of your lemma in the 1st English paper that has it. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 20:27 | answer | added | Alexandre Eremenko | timeline score: 12 | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 18:41 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Todd Trimble | ||
| Jul 14, 2014 at 15:56 | answer | added | Stefan Kohl♦ | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 15:16 | answer | added | Vít Tuček | timeline score: 12 | |
| S Jul 14, 2014 at 14:59 | history | suggested | Bill the Lizard | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
removed signature and paragraph indentation
|
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:52 | comment | added | Bruno | "Citing a dissertation in Ukrainian is worse than useless, it will just annoy people": This is funny to compare this remark to comments in the question mathoverflow.net/q/175988/16178. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:51 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jul 14, 2014 at 14:59 | |||||
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:28 | comment | added | Mark Grant | Maybe you could include a sentence or two explaining why it is trivial? That way you can help your readers reconstruct the proof, without appearing patronizing. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:23 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 15, 2014 at 2:25 | |||||
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:19 | answer | added | Salvatore Siciliano | timeline score: 17 | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:14 | answer | added | GH from MO | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 14:10 | comment | added | Michał Kukieła | I generally agree with Neil Strickland. However, if you decide to omit the proof of the lemma and only cite your thesis, in my opinion you should mention that the proof is "quite trivial" (if it really is). Why? I believe most of the readers will not look the result up in your thesis. However, knowing that it should be trivial, they will have more motivation to try finding the proof on their own. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 13:57 | comment | added | Pietro Majer | If you wish, you may include the information that the lemma has been proved in your PhD dissertation, in the introduction, or in a line just before stating it. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 13:24 | comment | added | Neil Strickland | Just include the proof. If readers find it trivial then they will skip over it. Citing a dissertation in Ukrainian is worse than useless, it will just annoy people. | |
| Jul 14, 2014 at 13:17 | history | asked | Ievgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |