Timeline for Is this statement of the Lévy–Khintchine formula ill-posed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21 at 2:20 | comment | added | Mingzhou Liu | Hi, I am wondering why $\phi_\mu\neq 0$ implies that there exiets a $f$ such that $\phi_\mu=e^f$? | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 5:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 5, 2020 at 4:59 | answer | added | AndreyF | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 15, 2020 at 21:48 | comment | added | Mateusz Kwaśnicki | This assumes "good will" of the reader, I believe. Compare with the following statement: If $\sqrt{x} = 1$, then $x = 1$. This is usually assumed to be true, but you could argue that if $x < 0$, then what is meant by $\sqrt{x}$? Here, in a similar way, you should read the definition of $\psi$ as "Suppose that the characteristic function of $\mu$ is non-zero, and its continuous logarithm is denoted by $\psi$." | |
| Nov 15, 2020 at 11:44 | history | asked | 0xbadf00d | CC BY-SA 4.0 |