@MartinSleziak There was so much wrong with that post that there was no point in editing out the offensive link. Even without the link it was borderline offensive due to excessive trolling. So, yeah, flagging it to death is the appropriate move.
@quid Honestly, I would rather of some idea of what topology would be meant for before unsynonymising. Or maybe figure out what general-topology is? I'm starting to think that general topology is like a donut hole: defined more in terms of what it is not, rather than what it is.
@arjafi Yes, I know. That's exactly what I am referring to. Since your proposal to remove the tag has +7, maybe it should be done.
Correct me if I am wrong, but regular users could only do this by bumping all 500 questions in that tag and removing the tag from each one manually. But mods can do that without bumping and without having to deal with each of the questions separately.
@MartinSleziak I have just pinged a CM about removing the subspaces tag. I'm not really certain about the other issues and would have to spend some more time thinking about them.
@arjafi Thanks for the reply. As explained in the meta post, it would be meant for nothing in particular. It's not a meaningful tag-name. It should be deprecated or even blacklisted. The point of the unsynonyming is not to use toplogy for something else but rather to avoid that questions are automatically and often wrongly tagged general-toplogy due to this synonym.
I am not sure I can define general topology well. But questions that are clearly algebraic toplogy questions are not general topology.
Let $G=\mathbf Z\times \mathbf Z$ and let $\langle x, y| \ xyx^{-1}y^{-1} \rangle$ be a presentation for $G$.
In Example 1.46 of Hatcher's Algebraic Topology, the author mentions that the presentation complex of $G$ is the torus $S^1\times S^1$.
I am not able to see why this is so.
The present...
Suppose I am given an exact sequence:
$$0\to G\xrightarrow{f} \mathbb{Z} \xrightarrow{g} \mathbb{Z} \xrightarrow{h} H\to 0 $$
where the first $\mathbb{Z}=H_3(A\cup B)$ and the second $\mathbb{Z}=H_2(A\cap B)$ where $A,B$ are solid tori. I compute the homology of $A\cup B$ and $A \cap B$ by not...
Not sure where to ask this...But there is a user, who is not at all new, who has been answering questions quite a bit lately. He also has developed a habit of going back to his answer, erasing it, but writes some sort of request for others delete his answer because he can't from his MSE app. When this happens once or twice, even three times...I can look past it...but said user, after confronting him twice before, pulled the same thing today.
Annoying, because they add to the low quality queue; but also, if he can wipe out an earlier answer he posted it, rendering it meaningless, he can obviously edit it to to improve it. If you check his "deleted posts" list, you'll likely see a number of his own deletes, but also many deletes by third parties.
I mean not that it is the only problem with that post, but really it should not be tagged general-topology (and not algebraic topology). And while I cannot prove it I'd bet that it was intended to being tagged just topology, which would not be optimal but at least not non-sense.
@arjafi sorry for another ping, but to put this differently, since for all I know quite literally noone (can) know what gets automatically retagged wouldn't it at least make sense to observe the situation for a while. To do a merge and to reinstate the synonym later is a triviality, to even understand the situation while it is in place by contrast is near impossible.
Suppose I am given an exact sequence:
$$0\to G\xrightarrow{f} \mathbb{Z} \xrightarrow{g} \mathbb{Z} \xrightarrow{h} H\to 0 $$
where the first $\mathbb{Z}=H_3(A\cup B)$ and the second $\mathbb{Z}=H_2(A\cap B)$ where $A,B$ are solid tori. I compute the homology of $A\cup B$ and $A \cap B$ by not...
How to calculate the homotopic group
$$
\pi_{3}(U(3)\times U(3)/U(1)\times U(1)) \simeq \pi_{3}(SU(3)\times SU(3))?
$$
