« first day (1811 days earlier)      last day (404 days later) » 

7:22 AM
I have removed the tag from this question: Inequality of a Wasserstein Metric property.
From this SEDE query we can see that there are 26 deleted question with this tag.
And this query returns posts which had this tag at some point. I see only one where the tag was removed (by GH from MO).
The question which have tag at the moment:
Q: How should you respond to a student who asks whether a very nice physical example constitutes a proof?

Amir Asghari"Is this really a proof?" is the exact question e-mailed to me today from an undergraduate mathematics student whom I know as a highly competent student. The one sentence question was accompanied with the following demo: I am looking for a down-to-earth, non-authoritative answer who one may gi...

Q: Experimental mathematics: how are floating point equations discovered/converted to exact equations?

vznthe 2005 AMS article/survey on experimental mathematics[1] by Bailey/Borwein mentions many remarkable successes in the field including new formulas for $\pi$ that were discovered via the PSLQ algorithm as well as many other examples. however, it appears to glaringly leave out any description of t...

Q: A question in the paper "the classification of algebras by dominant dimension"

Xiaosong PengI'm reading the paper "the classification of algebras by dominant dimension" by Bruno J.Mueller, the link is here http://cms.math.ca/10.4153/CJM-1968-037-9. In the proof of lemma 3 on page 402, there is a place I can't understand. Who can tell me what $E_R \oplus * \cong \oplus X_R$ and $_AHom_...

Q: 12th grade - Ramanujan Partition theory

JosephI've been really trying to prove Ramanujan Partition theory, and different sources give me different explanations. Can someone please explain how Ramanujan (and Euler) found out the following equation for the number of partitions for a given integer? Any help is appreciated thank you so much! $...

Q: Non-rigorous reasoning in rigorous mathematics

David HarrisI was wondering what role non-rigorous, heuristic type arguments play in rigorous math. Are there examples of rigorous, formal proofs in which a non-rigorous reasoning still plays a central part? Here is an example of what I am thinking of. You want to prove that some formula $f(n)$ holds, and y...

Q: Are there proofs that you feel you did not "understand" for a long time?

Amir AsghariPerhaps the "proofs" of ABC conjecture or newly released weak version of twin prime conjecture or alike readily come to your mind. These are not the proofs I am looking for. Indeed my question was inspired by some other posts seeking for a hint to understand a certain more or less well-establised...

Q: Proofs that require fundamentally new ways of thinking

gowersI do not know exactly how to characterize the class of proofs that interests me, so let me give some examples and say why I would be interested in more. Perhaps what the examples have in common is that a powerful and unexpected technique is introduced that comes to seem very natural once you are ...

Q: Insights from disproofs after counterexamples have been given

David G. StorkSome conjectures are disproved by a single counter-example and garner little or no further interest or study, such as (to my knowledge) Euler's conjecture in number theory that at least $n$ $n^{th}$ powers are required to sum to an $n^{th}$ power, for $n>2$ (disproved by counter-example by L. J. ...

There was a brief discussion about the tag here in this room: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/10243/2017/1/11
Jan 11 '17 at 6:14, by Martin Sleziak
The tag-info is empty. Is it clear what the tag is supposed to be used for? On math.SE this tag is was blacklisted, see here and here.
Jan 11 '17 at 11:41, by quid
@MartinSleziak the idea ought to be that it is for questions about proofs specifically. But really I think it's not a meaningful tag. I am actually surprised it's around. I do recall , which is not much better, and I think we got rid of missing-lemma at one point.
7:56 AM
Q: What is the intended use of the (proofs) tag?

Martin SleziakThere is a tag called proofs. This tag has empty tag-info. Without any usage guidance it is quite likely to be used incorrectly. The fact that there are many deleted questions having this tag can be considered a supporting evidence of this fact. (According to SEDE there are 26 such questions - ...

1 hour later…
9:04 AM
What would be suitable tags for Freshman's definition of sin(x)? Currently there is only the tag. (I have removed the tag; I suppose that it got there through removal of tag or some other similar tag.)
I was a bit surprised that there is neither tag nor tag on MO. And as far as the choice of the top-level tag is concerned, I don't really have an idea. Perhaps ?
Q: Freshman's definition of sin(x)?

QfwfqI would like to know how you would rigorously introduce the trigonometric functions ($\sin(x)$ and relatives) to first year calculus students. Suppose they have a reasonable definition of $\mathbb{R}$ (as Cauchy closure of the rationals, or as Dedekind cuts, or whatever), but otherwise require as...

In fact it seems that tag existed in 2013: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/851136/…
Strangely, trigonometry seems to be majority questions that are at least decent. Otherwise I'd suggest getting rid of it too. — Logan M Aug 19 '13 at 0:06
2 hours later…
11:04 AM
These are some examples of the posts where it might be quite difficult to find a replacement for the deprecated abstract-algebra tag: Textbook suggestion for advanced algebra?, How do you decide whether a question in abstract algebra is worth studying?, TM and abstract algebra
Q: Textbook suggestion for advanced algebra?

KeithAfter having a solid year long undergraduate course in abstract algebra, I'm interested in learning algebra at a more advanced level, especially in the context of category theory. I've done some research, and from what I've read, it seems that using Lang as a main text and Hungerford as a supple...

Q: How do you decide whether a question in abstract algebra is worth studying?

Alex B.Dear MO-community, I am not sure how mature my view on this is and I might say some things that are controversial. I welcome contradicting views. In any case, I find it important to clarify this in my head and hope that this community can help me doing that. So after this longish introduction, h...

Q: TM and abstract algebra

DalUsually, during lectures Turing Machines are firstly introduced from an informal point of view (for example, in this way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine#Informal_description) and then their definition is formalized (for example, in this way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machin...

7 hours later…
6:05 PM
@MartinSleziak I waited a bit whether somebody suggests a suitable tag and then I have retagged the question with the . (Maybe somebody will notice question and choose a more appropriate tag, if there is one. But from the top-level tags, this one seemed the closest.)

« first day (1811 days earlier)      last day (404 days later) »