Skip to main content
89 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 2 at 8:38 answer added Roland Bacher timeline score: 2
Nov 28 at 19:47 answer added user76284 timeline score: 2
Nov 28 at 19:29 answer added user76284 timeline score: 1
Nov 28 at 18:44 answer added user76284 timeline score: 1
Nov 28 at 17:08 answer added user76284 timeline score: 1
Nov 26 at 0:21 answer added Jesse Elliott timeline score: 2
Nov 25 at 22:47 answer added Sam Hopkins timeline score: 0
Nov 25 at 20:24 answer added Dan Romik timeline score: 3
Nov 24 at 21:04 answer added Turbo timeline score: 3
Nov 17 at 22:21 answer added Mohan timeline score: 3
Nov 17 at 19:41 answer added user76284 timeline score: 4
Nov 17 at 19:09 answer added user76284 timeline score: 2
Nov 13 at 4:04 answer added Daniel Weber timeline score: 2
Nov 13 at 2:43 answer added tkf timeline score: 3
Nov 13 at 2:34 answer added tkf timeline score: 3
Nov 12 at 14:21 answer added usul timeline score: 4
Nov 12 at 10:10 answer added Patrick Lambein timeline score: 3
Nov 12 at 8:34 answer added Lucenaposition timeline score: 4
Nov 12 at 7:12 comment added Ville Salo cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/47333/… some answers fit here.
Nov 12 at 0:47 answer added Nathaniel Johnston timeline score: 2
Nov 11 at 23:21 answer added Michael timeline score: 3
Nov 11 at 16:58 answer added Abhiram Natarajan timeline score: 3
Nov 11 at 14:44 answer added seldon timeline score: 2
Nov 11 at 14:26 comment added Miguel González There is the so-called Hartshorne-Serre correspondence between codimension $2$ smooth subvarieties $Y \subset X$ (with some additional condition) of a smooth algebraic variety $X$ and certain rank $2$ vector bundles on $X$. There is no general analogue of Serre's construction in codimension $3$ or more. mathoverflow.net/questions/136797/…
Nov 11 at 10:35 comment added Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine Many examples are of the form “for $n \geq 2$ things are simple; for $n \geq 3$ they’re complicated” (e.g. @BenJohnsrude’s comment of Kakeya sets, or Wojowu’s answer on free lattices). These seem much less notable or interesting than examples where the complexity of the problem is decreasing or non-monotonic in $n$ — where $n = 3$ is simple (and maybe also $n \geq 3$) but $n=2$ is complicated.
Nov 11 at 8:05 answer added HenrikRüping timeline score: 3
Nov 11 at 7:50 answer added Fedor Petrov timeline score: 2
Nov 11 at 7:25 answer added Phil Harmsworth timeline score: 2
Nov 11 at 6:24 answer added Fedor Petrov timeline score: 3
Nov 11 at 5:17 answer added Antoine Labelle timeline score: 6
Nov 11 at 4:29 answer added user369335 timeline score: 3
Nov 11 at 2:43 answer added Oscar Lanzi timeline score: 6
Nov 10 at 22:00 answer added user76284 timeline score: 8
Nov 10 at 21:53 answer added user76284 timeline score: 6
Nov 10 at 21:48 answer added C7X timeline score: 5
Nov 10 at 21:33 answer added user76284 timeline score: 6
Nov 10 at 21:10 comment added Sophie Swett I wonder how many of these are explained by the fact that when you have 2 possibilities, eliminating one possibility is the same thing as finding the answer, but when you have 3 or more possibilities, those are not the same thing.
Nov 10 at 18:23 answer added user76284 timeline score: 4
Nov 10 at 12:46 comment added Kimball Related: see math.stackexchange.com/q/3344266/11323 about 3 vs 4
Nov 10 at 12:42 answer added Alexandre Eremenko timeline score: 12
Nov 10 at 12:00 answer added M. Winter timeline score: 9
Nov 10 at 11:30 comment added eddy ardonne @YCor This also holds for the examples of the OP. Often counting $1,2,3,\infty$ makes sense.
Nov 10 at 9:38 comment added YCor For almost all answers, it is rather "2" vs "$n\ge 3$".
Nov 10 at 8:41 answer added Carl Schildkraut timeline score: 10
Nov 10 at 7:47 answer added Alessandro Della Corte timeline score: 11
Nov 10 at 7:41 history edited Federico Poloni
edited tags
Nov 10 at 5:49 answer added Fedor Petrov timeline score: 2
Nov 10 at 4:13 comment added user76284 I'd like to see an answer to the why question.
Nov 10 at 4:05 answer added Tony Huynh timeline score: 7
Nov 10 at 3:35 answer added Keith Kearnes timeline score: 10
Nov 10 at 2:28 history became hot network question
Nov 10 at 1:25 answer added Tim Campion timeline score: 5
Nov 10 at 0:35 answer added John Doyle timeline score: 23
Nov 9 at 23:43 comment added Gerry Myerson Maybe I was thinking of math.stackexchange.com/questions/1573308/… or of one of the many questions about "two" that are mentioned there under Linked or Related. Here on MO we have had mathoverflow.net/questions/915/…
Nov 9 at 23:24 comment added Gerry Myerson I think there was a question about oddities of two some time ago, perhaps it was on math.stackexchange.
Nov 9 at 23:23 answer added Gerry Myerson timeline score: 5
Nov 9 at 22:58 answer added Corentin B timeline score: 11
Nov 9 at 22:18 answer added Wojowu timeline score: 6
Nov 9 at 22:08 answer added Corentin B timeline score: 6
Nov 9 at 22:05 answer added Stefan Kohl timeline score: 10
Nov 9 at 22:02 answer added eddy ardonne timeline score: 15
Nov 9 at 21:48 answer added John Griesmer timeline score: 12
Nov 9 at 21:32 answer added Aleksei Kulikov timeline score: 3
Nov 9 at 21:15 answer added Gabe K timeline score: 63
Nov 9 at 21:13 answer added Denis Serre timeline score: 6
Nov 9 at 21:09 answer added eddy ardonne timeline score: 13
Nov 9 at 20:48 answer added Yemon Choi timeline score: 5
Nov 9 at 20:24 answer added Jean-Philippe Burelle timeline score: 46
Nov 9 at 20:16 answer added Wojowu timeline score: 23
Nov 9 at 19:59 answer added Mark Wildon timeline score: 6
Nov 9 at 19:58 history made wiki Post Made Community Wiki by David Roberts
Nov 9 at 19:47 answer added Jason Starr timeline score: 3
Nov 9 at 19:47 answer added eddy ardonne timeline score: 8
Nov 9 at 19:46 answer added Sam Hopkins timeline score: 11
Nov 9 at 19:45 comment added mathworker21 Many statements about primes hold unless the prime is $2$.
Nov 9 at 19:40 answer added Burak timeline score: 12
Nov 9 at 19:34 answer added eddy ardonne timeline score: 48
Nov 9 at 19:17 answer added Keith timeline score: 29
Nov 9 at 19:11 answer added Keith Kearnes timeline score: 8
Nov 9 at 19:06 answer added Joel David Hamkins timeline score: 18
Nov 9 at 18:57 answer added Nathaniel Johnston timeline score: 19
Nov 9 at 18:55 comment added Ben Johnsrude Something that doesn't quite fit the letter of the post, but perhaps the spirit: Kakeya sets are not too hard to understand in 2 dimensions, but become extremely difficult to understand in 3 dimensions.
Nov 9 at 18:47 answer added Nik Weaver timeline score: 16
Nov 9 at 18:47 comment added JP McCarthy $x_1^n+x_2^n=0$ vs $x_1^n+x_2^n+x_3^n=0$...
Nov 9 at 18:43 answer added Mark Wildon timeline score: 4
Nov 9 at 18:41 comment added Federico Poloni See this thread on Computational Science for many examples.
Nov 9 at 18:40 answer added Ahmad Beirami timeline score: 5
Nov 9 at 18:37 answer added David Manheim timeline score: 41
Nov 9 at 18:27 history asked Aryeh Kontorovich CC BY-SA 4.0