Timeline for Where to submit (relatively) easy solutions to known problems?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15 at 12:18 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Stefan Kohl♦ | ||
| Apr 3 at 15:57 | comment | added | David White | I agree with quid's answer (mathoverflow.net/a/89200/11540). If the problem was seriously attempted by others and then you solve it, that's a positive not a negative. But sometimes, the problem was considered "folklore" and the proof you wrote is one people might expect. Or, maybe there was already one proof in the literature and you found a second proof. In either case, consider submitting the paper to the Graduate Journal of Math (gradmath.org). Recording folklore and "alternative" proofs is a service, and can help grad students. | |
| Apr 8, 2019 at 1:45 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 8, 2019 at 13:02 | |||||
| Oct 23, 2017 at 10:57 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 23, 2017 at 12:36 | |||||
| Feb 23, 2012 at 9:44 | comment | added | Gordon Royle | If it answers a problem that other people have posed and at least a few have tried seriously to solve, then an elementary solution is a testament to your ingenuity and IMO even stronger than a long difficult and technical paper; publish in the best journal appropriate to the question. If it answers an uninteresting question raised in passing in a little-known paper and you've never heard of anyone working in it, then consider it a much-needed gap in the literature and leave it alone. | |
| Feb 23, 2012 at 0:12 | answer | added | JRN | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 23:51 | answer | added | Michael Hardy | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 20:04 | answer | added | Benoît Kloeckner | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 15:56 | comment | added | Thierry Zell | Depending on the field, it is not unusual to have very important papers that are nevertheless very short and easy to follow. In that case, it's getting the right idea that counts, and if you're the first one to solve a long-standing problem, then people are not shy about giving you a lot of credit for your idea. But this might be related to field-specific culture, so you have to play it by ear. But as pointed out below, if you've been told to aim higher, you probably should. | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 14:53 | answer | added | user9072 | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 14:01 | comment | added | Jim Conant | One thing you can do is jazz up the intro and abstract to point out that you are for the first time applying technique X to field Y, and it fairly easily yields the solution to open problem Z. Thus the importance of the paper is not the difficulty of the proof, but the introduction of technique X. This sort of paper has the potential to be widely cited as other researchers in field Y start to use technique X, so I think a good journal is very appropriate. | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 13:42 | answer | added | someadvice | timeline score: 12 | |
| Feb 22, 2012 at 13:31 | history | asked | Anonymous | CC BY-SA 3.0 |