Timeline for Expressability of an electrical circuit with probabilistic switches
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 2009 at 23:28 | answer | added | Kristal Cantwell | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 27, 2009 at 23:47 | comment | added | Gjergji Zaimi | Agreed. I had problems understanding this in its original form for example: mathoverflow.net/questions/9844/… | |
| Dec 27, 2009 at 23:27 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | I think that as a policy we should require physics/mathematical modeling questions to be posted similar to how you revised this one. The background above it is nice, but clarity should be more important. | |
| Dec 25, 2009 at 8:14 | history | edited | Gjergji Zaimi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 463 characters in body
|
| Dec 23, 2009 at 23:05 | answer | added | Kristal Cantwell | timeline score: 4 | |
| Dec 23, 2009 at 22:26 | comment | added | Gjergji Zaimi | I edited it a little, a number q being good means basically that you can construct circuits which are open with probability p, for every p of the form $b/q^n$ (using as many switches as described above as you want, but finitely many) | |
| Dec 23, 2009 at 22:23 | history | edited | Gjergji Zaimi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 327 characters in body
|
| Dec 23, 2009 at 22:12 | comment | added | Ben Weiss | Could you clarify the question some more? The statement of a "number being good" is still unclear to me. There are a bunch of numbers floating around this problem, and I'm not sure what you're referring to. | |
| Dec 23, 2009 at 20:34 | history | asked | Gjergji Zaimi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |