Timeline for Proofs of theorems that proved more or deeper results than what was first supposed or stated as the corresponding theorem
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2021 at 15:26 | comment | added | lalala | @TimothyChow thanks, I misread your comment. | |
| Apr 12, 2021 at 12:23 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | @lalala The problem they solved is at most a couple of decades old. | |
| Apr 12, 2021 at 6:19 | comment | added | lalala | @TimothyChow if it is from the 19th century, couldnt one claim 'centuries-old', since it is 2 centuries? | |
| Mar 10, 2021 at 14:45 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | @PatrickLutz I agree that the problem is not "centuries-old"; my guess as to what happened is that someone said that the concept of a planar graph dates from the 19th century, and this fact got "lost in translation." Planarity testing is an old problem, but planarity testing in the streaming model is a much more recent question. | |
| Mar 9, 2021 at 19:18 | comment | added | Patrick Lutz | There is an article in Quanta which I think does a better job describing this result here. Also, it seems to me that the problem was not "centuries-old" but much more recent (not that this makes the result any less impressive). | |
| Mar 9, 2021 at 18:59 | comment | added | Patrick Lutz | I think this answer is about the same result as one of the other answers. | |
| Mar 9, 2021 at 15:16 | history | edited | André LFS Bacci | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 392 characters in body
|
| Mar 8, 2021 at 17:07 | comment | added | user44143 | Can you link to the original paper or the review, or anything that MO users are more likely to have access to than Popular Mechanics? | |
| Mar 8, 2021 at 17:02 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 8, 2021 at 17:24 | |||||
| S Mar 8, 2021 at 17:00 | history | answered | André LFS Bacci | CC BY-SA 4.0 | |
| S Mar 8, 2021 at 17:00 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by André LFS Bacci |