Timeline for How many integer partitions of a googol (10^100) into at most 60 parts
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
41 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 2018 at 16:52 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://tea.mathoverflow.net/ with http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/
|
|
| Aug 12, 2011 at 13:43 | comment | added | Gerald Edgar | @Andrej: wait until it reopens (now) then vote to close. | |
| Aug 12, 2011 at 2:48 | history | reopened |
Andrej Bauer Gil Kalai Noah Snyder José Figueroa-O'Farrill Todd Trimble |
||
| Aug 12, 2011 at 2:19 | history | edited | Noah Snyder | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 572 characters in body
|
| Aug 9, 2011 at 9:10 | comment | added | Andrej Bauer | Ooops, I did not mean to nominate for reopening. How do I undo? | |
| Jul 30, 2011 at 11:25 | comment | added | joro | This might be relevant for faster approach: A GENERAL METHOD FOR DETERMINING A CLOSED FORMULA FOR THE NUMBER OF PARTITIONS OF THE INTEGER n INTO m POSITIVE INTEGERS FOR SMALL VALUES OF m: fq.math.ca/Scanned/21-4/colman.pdf | |
| Jul 28, 2011 at 12:04 | comment | added | joro | @Doron what is the period of the sequence mod p? Would it be possible your approach to give faster pseudo primality test? | |
| Jul 28, 2011 at 7:41 | comment | added | joro | In sage p_60(10^100) was computed in 24 minutes : Time: CPU 1245.17 s, Wall: 1392.92 s | |
| Jul 28, 2011 at 0:36 | vote | accept | Doron Zeilberger | ||
| Jul 27, 2011 at 16:54 | comment | added | Scott Aaronson | Gil 16:08: sorry, no dice. :-) | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 19:18 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | Doron, now that the problem was solved and the solution was confirmed, what was your point/motivation to start with? | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 18:31 | comment | added | François G. Dorais | Dear Doron: In case you didn't follow the discussion on meta, I closed the question for the sole purpose of preventing spurious answers from appearing. Your question will remain on MO forever with the same visibility as any other question. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 18:10 | comment | added | Douglas Zare | I didn't finish the calculation, but my approach was to use partial fractions. I think a computer algebra system shouldn't have too much trouble computing the coefficient of $(q-\zeta_i^j)^{-k}$. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 18:10 | comment | added | joro | @Doron, please try math.stackexchange.com ;-) lol | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 17:46 | history | closed |
Todd Trimble Tom Church François G. Dorais |
no longer relevant | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 17:27 | answer | added | Peter | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:13 | vote | accept | Doron Zeilberger | ||
| Jul 28, 2011 at 0:36 | |||||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:12 | vote | accept | Doron Zeilberger | ||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:13 | |||||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:10 | vote | accept | Doron Zeilberger | ||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:12 | |||||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:08 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | I think that Scott Aaronson may be convinced to give 100,000 dollars to DZ if indeed a new one way function was discovered here. (Which will leave Doron 99,900.) | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 16:00 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | Dear Gil, if a new one-way function application were the point of this, then what would be the harm of saying so now? It would add immensely to the interest of the problem, I'm sure, in the eyes of many. This is MO: let's be upfront and transparent. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 15:47 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | Dear Todd, I am also wondering but can't we wait for one week? I also agree with Joe that it is unlikely that we have here an example of a question which is hard to solve, has a quick way to check the answer, and easy to solve if you know some secret (like the factoring n=pq example). Not just because it is not mentioned in the original post but because if this is a new one-way function of this kind this would be spectacular beyond belief. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 15:37 | answer | added | joro | timeline score: 24 | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 15:30 | comment | added | Kaveh | @Doron, I am guessing that you are expecting that this is not possible in practice, so I would be interested to know what you are trying to demonstrate with this question. ps: if you don't further restrict the question, I can use a succinct form to give the answer (using an algorithm), so I guess you want an explicit answer in some normal form (say a string of decimal digits). | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 15:12 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | @Doron: with all due respect, a number of people are wondering why you are "asking" this question, i.e., posing this challenge. Such challenges are generally not considered an appropriate use of MO. And so, for an exception to be made, there should be good reason. Thanks. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 14:27 | history | reopened |
Gjergji Zaimi Jonas Meyer Daniel Moskovich user9072 Akhil Mathew |
||
| Jul 24, 2011 at 13:03 | comment | added | user9072 | Since it took me a while to figure this out, let me record it: all 'informal' votes seem to be cancelled, as André's initial vote against closing cancels Joe's. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 12:45 | comment | added | joro | I would try a wild guess for this challenge. log(X)/log(10) = 5737.9378 and the actual number is at: paste.ubuntu.com/651168 | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 12:20 | comment | added | Joe Silverman | I'm voting to keep this question closed, because in any case, I do not think it is appropriate to offer cash prizes on MO. It would certainly be possible to rephrase this as an MO question, but not the way it currently reads. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 12:18 | comment | added | Joe Silverman | @Fedor: If there's a quick way to check an answer (similar to, say factoring $n=pq$), then that information should be included as part of the question. My guess here is that it is not the case. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 11:25 | comment | added | Fedor Petrov | But why do people think that Doron knows the answer? Maybe, there is some quick way to check that the answer is right, but there is no known quick way to get the answer? | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 10:27 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | I am curious to know the answer (well, not the exact number but how to get to it, and what is the point). Since the question is self-terminating in a weak or so I propose (thus cancelling Harald's vote) to reopen it until August 2. and then reconsider. I dont know if Doron knows the answer but if he does I hope this knowledge be shared (e.g. in an August 1 edit of the question). | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 10:03 | comment | added | Harald Hanche-Olsen | Actually, I'm voting against reopening. | |
| Jul 24, 2011 at 0:33 | history | closed |
Steve Huntsman Ryan Budney user6976 Felipe Voloch Igor Rivin |
not a real question | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:41 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | tea.mathoverflow.net/discussion/1091/… | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:39 | history | edited | Gjergji Zaimi |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:30 | comment | added | André Henriques | Actually, I'm voting against closing. | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:29 | comment | added | André Henriques | I'm not voting to close, even though I'm somewhat tempted to. I hope that whoever answers the challenge also posts a complete explanation of the method used (otherwise it's kind of useless). If nobody comes up with the answer by the deadline, then I'd hope Doron posts the answer himself, along with the explanation of the method. Finally, MO doesn't deal in US dollars: it deals in MO reputation points (see FAQ). There's a system of "bounties" by which a user can offer some of his MO reputation points for an answer to a particular question (of course, Doron would first have earn those points...) | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:17 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | First of all, welcome to MO. Second of all, I am voting to close your question (interesting as it may be)--because apparently you already know the answer. | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 23:17 | comment | added | Joe Silverman | This qualifies as "Math Is Fun", but I'm wondering if MathOverflow is really the right place. Doron, I assume that you know the answer, since otherwise how will you check that someone's answer is correct. MathOverflow is designed for people to ask questions to which they do not know the answer, in order to enlist the aid of the MO community. And posting an answer on MO is, to my mind, not a very useful thing. What might be useful would be to post an explanation of how one does the calculation. Anyway, I'm not voting to close, but I question the posting of "challenges" of this sort on MO. | |
| Jul 23, 2011 at 22:30 | history | asked | Doron Zeilberger | CC BY-SA 3.0 |