Timeline for "Nicely" strong measure zero sets
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 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/
|
|
| Dec 13, 2016 at 17:32 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | @Goldstern Thanks! At a glance it seems like it might do, but I don't have time right now to read it in detail - regardless, it looks interesting. | |
| Dec 13, 2016 at 17:27 | comment | added | Goldstern | It seems to me that the construction that I sketch in mathoverflow.net/questions/63497/… will give a continuous function . (I have to check the details, because that construction uses sequences of names, not sequences of natural numbers.) | |
| Jan 11, 2016 at 4:46 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | "Continuity" is just the lowest level of the hierarchy, so that's where I start. | |
| Jan 11, 2016 at 4:45 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | @BoazTsaban Sorry for the late reply, I only just saw your comment. This question is motivated partly by the linked questions (especially Andreas' answer to "Two strengthenings"), as well as general descriptive set theoretic instincts: saying "$A$ is strong measure zero" asserts the existence of a functional with certain properties, and it's natural to ask how the complexity of that functional will affect the set $A$. In particular, "simple" witnessing functionals ought to imply that $A$ is countable (assuming reasonable set-theoretic hypotheses). That's what I'm interested in here. (cont'd) | |
| Jan 11, 2016 at 4:43 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | Please do not replace the "descriptive set theory" tag (which is appropriate, and well-used) with "selection principles" (which is appropriate, but only has 8 questions attached to it currently). | |
| Jan 11, 2016 at 4:42 | history | edited | Noah Schweber |
edited tags
|
|
| S Jan 10, 2016 at 22:45 | history | edited | Jonathan Beardsley |
more focused tags
|
|
| Jan 10, 2016 at 22:18 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 10, 2016 at 22:45 | |||||
| Dec 14, 2015 at 17:09 | comment | added | Boaz Tsaban | Could you supply some motivation for this question? The reason I see a need for one is that continuity deals with the head of the sequence, whereas covering depends on the tail, so I see no clear connection. The question makes sense, but I seek for motivation. | |
| Oct 12, 2015 at 5:43 | history | edited | Noah Schweber | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 191 characters in body
|
| Oct 12, 2015 at 4:18 | history | asked | Noah Schweber | CC BY-SA 3.0 |