Timeline for Problems where we can't make a canonical choice, solved by looking at all choices at once
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
43 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2022 at 14:34 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
http -> https (the question was bumped anyway)
|
| Mar 26, 2019 at 0:01 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Someone has recently voted to close this as "off-topic". Given that the question and the answers seem fine, perhaps the voter would care to leave an explanation here? | |
| Mar 26, 2019 at 0:00 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 26, 2019 at 1:29 | |||||
| Jun 25, 2017 at 13:46 | answer | added | Todd Trimble | timeline score: 14 | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Oct 10, 2013 at 7:58 | answer | added | Simon Henry | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 10, 2013 at 2:28 | answer | added | Lennart Meier | timeline score: 12 | |
| Feb 17, 2011 at 16:06 | answer | added | godelian | timeline score: 6 | |
| Dec 25, 2010 at 17:59 | comment | added | Anixx | Is it motivated by quantum conputing? | |
| Dec 24, 2010 at 22:15 | answer | added | darij grinberg | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 at 17:09 | answer | added | Stanley Yao Xiao | timeline score: 9 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 23:07 | answer | added | Vamsi | timeline score: 11 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 22:22 | answer | added | David Roberts♦ | timeline score: 6 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 21:19 | answer | added | Richard Stanley | timeline score: 9 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 20:58 | answer | added | Noah Stein | timeline score: 11 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 20:12 | answer | added | JBorger | timeline score: 21 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 15:36 | comment | added | gowers | A neat formal definition of the positive integer $n$ is to take the set of all sets of size $n$. Hmm ... actually perhaps not. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 15:34 | answer | added | gowers | timeline score: 15 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 15:20 | answer | added | gowers | timeline score: 14 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 15:01 | answer | added | Keerthi Madapusi | timeline score: 7 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 13:37 | answer | added | David Corfield | timeline score: 3 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 13:19 | answer | added | Johannes Hahn | timeline score: 40 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 12:36 | answer | added | Allen Knutson | timeline score: 3 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 12:15 | answer | added | Greg Graviton | timeline score: 29 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 11:54 | answer | added | Guillaume Brunerie | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 11:40 | answer | added | Dmitri Pavlov | timeline score: 6 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 11:23 | answer | added | Keivan Karai | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 10:04 | comment | added | darij grinberg | The first I thought above when I read Quiaochu's first comment are sheaves. What about them? | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 9:59 | answer | added | Andrei Moroianu | timeline score: 4 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 6:49 | answer | added | Terry Tao | timeline score: 9 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 5:31 | answer | added | Qiaochu Yuan | timeline score: 5 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 5:14 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Also, I would be interested if you asked the Burnside's lemma question. I think the lemma can be categorified and it would be quite interesting to have an opportunity to try to work this out. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 5:08 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | I think Zev means something like the following: suppose one has an algebraic object G to which one can attach a collection of related objects G_a, but to do so one has to make an arbitrary choice of a. So instead one considers something like the direct product of all the G_a. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 5:02 | answer | added | Marty | timeline score: 33 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:43 | answer | added | Steven Landsburg | timeline score: 22 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:37 | history | edited | Zev Chonoles | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added somewhat-example; added 39 characters in body
|
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:34 | answer | added | Alex R. | timeline score: 22 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:23 | comment | added | Zev Chonoles | I'll admit, it may well be too vague. I was thinking more of a result like Burnside's Lemma, but for some reason this seems to me not be quite what I'm after. Maybe I'm being too picky. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:21 | comment | added | Derrick Stolee | And of course, the probabilistic method is really a special kind of counting. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:21 | comment | added | Derrick Stolee | Do you mean something more like using expectation in the probabilistic method? Or perhaps entropy? Both of these deal with "average" properties, on random variables which are too complicated to even sample algorithmically. | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:19 | answer | added | Gerald Edgar | timeline score: 13 | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:13 | comment | added | Ryan Budney | Your question seems too vague. For example, the problem of computing the average of $\sin(x)$ on $[0,2\pi]$, isn't this an example of what you're looking for? | |
| Dec 21, 2010 at 4:04 | history | asked | Zev Chonoles | CC BY-SA 2.5 |