Timeline for Does every set admit a rigid binary relation? (and how is this related to the Axiom of Choice?)
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Jul 19, 2011 at 12:44 | answer | added | Goldstern | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 19, 2011 at 0:50 | answer | added | ikp | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 31, 2010 at 5:07 | answer | added | Justin Palumbo | timeline score: 15 | |
| Jan 2, 2010 at 21:19 | vote | accept | Joel David Hamkins | ||
| Dec 28, 2009 at 16:53 | answer | added | Justin Palumbo | timeline score: 16 | |
| Nov 24, 2009 at 19:40 | answer | added | Joel David Hamkins | timeline score: 12 | |
| Nov 20, 2009 at 21:31 | answer | added | saf | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 20, 2009 at 18:56 | answer | added | Kristal Cantwell | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 20, 2009 at 16:33 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | That was a typo! Of course I mean no nontrivial automorphisms. (or only the trivial automorphism). | |
| Nov 20, 2009 at 15:23 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
typo "only" should be "no"
|
| Nov 20, 2009 at 14:45 | comment | added | Harald Hanche-Olsen | That's the first time I heard of a structure having only nontrivial automorhphisms. | |
| Nov 20, 2009 at 13:25 | history | asked | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 2.5 |