Timeline for Where to publish a new proof of an old theorem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2021 at 10:08 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| Feb 16, 2021 at 16:31 | answer | added | David White | timeline score: 5 | |
| Feb 15, 2021 at 17:09 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 16, 2021 at 19:13 | |||||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 3:03 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 11:04 | |||||
| Feb 12, 2017 at 12:22 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Todd Trimble | ||
| Feb 11, 2017 at 1:57 | history | edited | Qfwfq | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 16 characters in body; edited title
|
| Feb 10, 2017 at 23:25 | comment | added | Gro-Tsen | If your proof is of pedagogical interest and/or can be integrated in a review of the subject, you could try L'Enseignement mathématique. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:32 | vote | accept | M.Lopes | ||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:20 | comment | added | M.Lopes | @StefanKohl, I don't want to go into many details, otherwise you'd prove it yourself. :) | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:20 | comment | added | M.Lopes | @WłodzimierzHolsztyński, unfortunately my time machine has not been working lately. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:20 | comment | added | M.Lopes | @AnthonyQuas, no, no advantages whatsoever. It's just interesting because it is more simple and quick than the standard demonstration, although it relies on more advanced math. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:19 | comment | added | M.Lopes | @NoahSchweber, thank you for your suggestion. I think I will consider that option after a few more attempts. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 21:54 | answer | added | Karl Schwede | timeline score: 12 | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 21:02 | comment | added | Stefan Kohl♦ | It all depends on what your "old theorem" is, and how your new proof of it looks like -- for example, if you have a 5-pages proof that all finite simple groups are either cyclic or 2-generated which does not use CFSG, I'd suggest you to submit to the Annals ... . | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 20:34 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | "Where to publish a new demonstration of an old theorem?" -- in a scientific magazine which ceased to exist before WWI, preferably before the original first published proof was conceived. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 19:52 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 22:50 | |||||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 19:33 | answer | added | Alexandre Eremenko | timeline score: 30 | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:39 | answer | added | Gerald Edgar | timeline score: 28 | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:37 | comment | added | Anthony Quas | One thing that is probably asking yourself: are there any advantages to the new proof over the previously existing proofs? (e.g. does it rely on basic complex analysis rather than the nuclear theory of Banach algebras). If the new proof is longer than the old one, then this is likely to be a problem. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:35 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | All else failing, you could always post it on arXiv (and indeed you might do this even if you do publish it somewhere else); obviously this isn't really a "publication," but it does make your work public. | |
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:00 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:39 | |||||
| Feb 10, 2017 at 16:00 | history | asked | M.Lopes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |