@weeab00 SE isn't really a social media site, and discussion about specific users is off-topic on both the main site and the meta site. Why do you think that this NEEDS to be a topic of conversation on the site?
Claim: every number of the for 1111...... in base 2 can be converted to 1 after using the collatz function n times
I will be using induction
assume a number which is of the form 1111..K(times)..11 is traceble to 1 after some n number of steps
now if we prove it for $(K+1)times$ we are done then...
so to reflect that, ideally, the question should be really good too... perhaps written by someone who actually studied the topic and is asking it just to create a question that would serve as a reference for others
@LukasHeger probably something like "recommend me the best book on the topic" would be opinion-based, while questions of the type "what's a good book to study X from" or "what's a good book to find X in" are not
The community bot just bumped math.stackexchange.com/q/4126083 . It seems be a support question for Wolfram Alpha, and is therefore off-topic here. The answer also doesn't seem to really be an answer. I am going to close it, and would recommend deletion.
This older question was closed a few months back for being off-topic. There have been an annoying number of edits recently. Maybe it is time to put it to bed? math.stackexchange.com/q/3397697
Request re-opening (and possible clarifications) for Self-learning mathematics [closed]
My question was closed by the following reason:
Questions about choosing a course, academic program, career path, etc. are off-topic. Such questions should be directed to those employed by the institution in ...
I have a question regarding writing a paper on the topic "Continuity in Prime Gap Problems." Once the reader understands how the $2$-separated case works (twin primes) it becomes obvious how one could apply the same tactic to solve all $2k$-separated cases including $0$-separated (infinitude of ...
Btw, the author of my prior-said SV posted a very similar SV question 6 months ago. That might be helpful to anyone who has the time and motivation to help them reformulate to an on-topic question
@XanderHenderson OP tagged it as an SV, and OP's question is "Does my proof make it clear...." and the proof is a rephrasing of a proof from another thread (so a dupe), etc. There are many reasons why it is off-topic.
@BillDubuque While I didn't think that it is a great question, I don't think that it is an SV question. They seem to want general writing advice (also off-topic, probably), not a solution verification.
@ТymaGaidash Not a wise decision by some diamond mod since there is now no signal to users that such PSQs are off-topic and should not be answered. Not to mention that the answerer - who continually ignores EOQS policy - has been rewarded with ~150 rep. Is there any hope for site quality when nothing can be done to stop such policy violations.
Someone pointed to me that the deleted question actually had 9 up votes and 5 down votes (and I am not even sure if those downvotes were a result of someone in this or similar chatroom deliberately seeking downvotes to close, referring to answer from @XanderHenderson regarding my "separate topic" question above).
I tried to find a meta question discussing whether a question is on-topic if it asks "what's wrong with this proof, if anything?" without asking about a particular dubious point in the proof. There doesn't seem to be much consensus.
@XanderHenderson Would it be accurate to say that "what's wrong with this proof" questions are usually on topic, but not if the statement supposedly proved is a famous open conjecture?
@Feeds I'm a little surprised that this question was so badly received, and I don't quite understand why. "What's wrong with this proof" questions are on topic, aren't they?
i'm holding off on voting to close this for now, but i imagine this will fall under opinion-based / off-topic for many: math.stackexchange.com/q/4955249
I agree that the consensus on old questions is different than that on recent questions. But I don't know if the same is true for answers, and I couldn't find anything on the topic
The long-time problem, the Collatz Conjecture (or the 3x+1 problem), is still an open research topic.
It states that, starting with any integer number, $a_0$, the sequence given by:
$a_{n+1}= \begin{cases} \
3a_{n}+1 & \text{ if } a_{n} \text{ odd}, \\\
\frac{a_{n}}{2} & \text{ if } a_{n} \t...
@amWhy Given that the E here stands for "Edit", and one of the questions asked was "Would it be appropriate to edit this question?", I think it's on topic. Also, there is, perhaps, an implied "And if the answer is wrong, should I/others vote to delete it?"
@XanderHenderson That is a question about physics in my opinion. But I am not familiar with the standards on physics.stackexchange.com, so I cannot tell if the question is on-topic there.
@XanderHenderson My point is that it is another example of that user posting a completely useless machine-generated answer on a topic on which they seem to have little knowledge.
The long-time problem, the Collatz Conjecture (or the 3x+1 problem), is still an open research topic.
It states that, starting with any integer number, $a_0$, the sequence given by:
$a_{n+1}= \begin{cases} \
3a_{n}+1 & \text{ if } a_{n} \text{ odd}, \\\
\frac{a_{n}}{2} & \text{ if } a_{n} \t...
how accurate is this about collatz?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5503300.msg64334900#msg64334900
