Timeline for What happens to the solutions of a fourth-order boundary-value problem as you turn off the fourth-order coefficient?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2013 at 0:33 | history | edited | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
removed one remaining 'wrong' latex
|
| S Jul 7, 2013 at 23:55 | history | suggested | Jeremy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Eliminating use of latex.mathoverflow.net, per http://meta.mathoverflow.net/a/385
|
| Jul 7, 2013 at 23:39 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jul 7, 2013 at 23:55 | |||||
| Aug 21, 2010 at 10:33 | answer | added | Aleksey Pichugin | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 12, 2009 at 1:58 | answer | added | Duke Leto | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 11, 2009 at 22:46 | answer | added | timur | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 11, 2009 at 17:46 | vote | accept | Theo Johnson-Freyd | ||
| Nov 10, 2009 at 21:13 | answer | added | Duke Leto | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 10, 2009 at 4:58 | answer | added | Duke Leto | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 7, 2009 at 7:48 | comment | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | I have also posted a related question, which may be thought of as a warm-up to this one: mathoverflow.net/questions/4507 | |
| Nov 7, 2009 at 0:45 | comment | added | j.c. | Generically I would expect the perturbation to be singular since $\epsilon$ multiplies a term with more derivatives than any other, but I can't give a good argument at the moment. | |
| Nov 6, 2009 at 23:10 | history | asked | Theo Johnson-Freyd | CC BY-SA 2.5 |