Timeline for What conditions are sufficient to prove a transformation in $\mathbb{R}^2$ is affine? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 2018 at 10:01 | history | closed |
user6976 abx Francois Ziegler Chris Godsil coudy |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 15:12 | comment | added | Iosif Pinelis | @FrancoisZiegler : Thank you for your suggestion. I have posted a corresponding answer at mathoverflow.net/questions/139978/… . | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 5:46 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak |
removed deprecated (geometry) tag - see the tag info: https://mathoverflow.net/tags/geometry/info; if there are some other geometry-related tags which are suitable, please use some of them instead
|
|
| Mar 15, 2018 at 5:17 | comment | added | Francois Ziegler | @IosifPinelis Yes; I still wonder if everything here, including your interesting answer and comment, might not find a better home at the other question. Cf. also the references at MR 3471078. | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 3:35 | comment | added | Iosif Pinelis | In my first comment here, I wrote "When we have just proved". Of course, I meant "When we had just proved". | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 2:50 | comment | added | Iosif Pinelis | @FrancoisZiegler : As explained on page 2737 in the paper cited in my answer below, the proof in the book by Berger you cited at mathoverflow.net/questions/139978/… contains gaps/errors. Also, as noted in my answer, one only needs surjectivity, rather than the bijectivity condition assumed in Berger's book. | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 2:42 | history | edited | Iosif Pinelis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body; edited title
|
| Mar 15, 2018 at 2:42 | comment | added | Francois Ziegler | Possible duplicate of Line-preserving bijection of ${\mathbb{R}}^n$ onto itself | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 2:29 | comment | added | Iosif Pinelis | I think the question is OK. When we have just proved, with Chubarev, the theorem referred to in my answer below, we did not have any idea about the existence of the fundamental theorem of geometry -- we found it in the literature only after we proved our result. | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 2:24 | answer | added | Iosif Pinelis | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 15, 2018 at 1:55 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 17, 2018 at 10:01 | |||||
| Mar 15, 2018 at 1:35 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 15, 2018 at 1:37 | |||||
| Mar 15, 2018 at 1:31 | history | asked | Sharky Kesa | CC BY-SA 3.0 |