Timeline for Is it possible to improve the Whitney embedding theorem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2022 at 17:00 | history | edited | Glorfindel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
broken link fixed, cf. https://meta.mathoverflow.net/q/5301/70594
|
| Jun 5, 2018 at 5:15 | history | edited | Ben McKay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
spelling, grammar
|
| Jun 5, 2018 at 1:07 | history | edited | Danny Ruberman | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fang and Fuquan are two parts of a single persons name, not two people!
|
| Mar 7, 2011 at 8:59 | comment | added | Kelly Davis | @Ben Thanks. Things were just getting interesting, and I didn't want the fun to stop early. | |
| Mar 7, 2011 at 8:59 | comment | added | Ben McMillan | Ok, my apologies, I am new to Mathoverflow. May I ask what is the proper etiquette for accepting answers? I assumed I was supposed to pick one, which was hard because all three are very informative and interesting, even if they didn't entirely answer my question (ie embeddable closed connected manifolds for arbitrary dimension). In fact, I did not expect to get a full answer to the question. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 23:41 | comment | added | Kelly Davis | I agree. This isn't an answer to the full question. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 23:36 | comment | added | John Klein | This answers the question in dimensions 3. But I do not see how it does answers it in other dimensions. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 23:19 | vote | accept | Ben McMillan | ||
| Mar 7, 2011 at 8:53 | |||||
| Mar 6, 2011 at 23:19 | vote | accept | Ben McMillan | ||
| Mar 6, 2011 at 23:19 | |||||
| Mar 6, 2011 at 21:16 | history | answered | Bruno Martelli | CC BY-SA 2.5 |