Timeline for Existence of a Borel measurable function below any positive function
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 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/
|
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 22:38 | comment | added | Robert Israel | It's hard to imagine a very explicit approach, since it's consistent with ZF (without Choice) that there are no non-Borel functions at all. | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | And since I am already giving unsolicited advice, I will also mention that registering would probably make easier for you to follow your questions, comment on them, etc. (It is easier to lose access to an unregistered account than to a registered account. If you do not have access to your account, you can't comment on your question or edit your question.) | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:02 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | Still it might be interesting to see whether somebody comes up with a more direct/explicit approach. In general, I think that it is advised a bit before accepting an answer. Just to see whether you get some better answers or whether somebody points out a mistake in the answers which were posted so far. | |
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:00 | vote | accept | Mario | ||
| Jul 7, 2016 at 13:00 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 11 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2016 at 12:59 | history | answered | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |