Timeline for Is it known that the ring of periods is not a field?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
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/
|
|
| Jan 24, 2015 at 13:45 | history | edited | Wolfgang |
added tag
|
|
| Aug 27, 2012 at 17:03 | vote | accept | Franz Lemmermeyer | ||
| Aug 26, 2012 at 21:56 | answer | added | AFK | timeline score: 25 | |
| Jun 2, 2010 at 2:19 | history | edited | Victor Protsak |
edited tags
|
|
| Apr 6, 2010 at 20:00 | answer | added | Marty | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 6, 2010 at 18:13 | comment | added | Jacques Carette | It would be extremely surprising if it was a field. D-finite functions satisfy all sorts of closure properties, but NOT inversion. And all periods that I know are actually evaluations of D-finite functions. | |
| Apr 6, 2010 at 13:20 | history | asked | Franz Lemmermeyer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |