Timeline for Why are lacunary series so badly behaved?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 2, 2019 at 15:34 | comment | added | LSpice | @LiviuNicolaescu's answer mentioned by @AndrésE.Caicedo. | |
| Mar 2, 2013 at 2:40 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | See also math.stackexchange.com/questions/318009/… | |
| Mar 7, 2012 at 4:14 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | @Mariano: Yes. A nice place to see how (historically) this came to be is the paper by Kahane mentioned in Liviu Nicolaescu's answer. Around the time of his dissertation, Borel came to the realization that Taylor series are, in general, not continuable. But he didn't have a way of making his intuition precise as randomness and probability where not yet formally developed. This was addressed in 1929 by Steinhaus. | |
| Mar 5, 2012 at 23:49 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | Can this veryspecialness be more precise? | |
| Mar 5, 2012 at 14:37 | history | answered | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |