I might be wrong, but I think that this question is nonsense.

@XanderHenderson let me take a careful read through it first.

@XanderHenderson no it's a legitimate question. The person is basically asking if there is a tangible value that formalizes the notion that some integrals of simple functions are closer or farther away from resembling the original function.

closed formness and such

I mean the answer is definitely no but I don't think we should punish the asker for that.

@Shaun that second one you linked is a specific problem likely an exercise from a book. Is that the right link?

The Frattini subgroup one, @TheGreatDuck? If so, yeah.

@Shaun math.stackexchange.com/questions/179512/…

i dont see Frattini

@TheGreatDuck That's not the second one I posted recently. I think that's the source of the confusion. It's still the right link, either way.

I think the one you pointed out is too broad since it asks multiple questions.

Someone thinks they have a proof of the twin prime conjecture.

@Shaun multiple parts is not too broad

broadness means broadness of the subject material

Well, I suppose you're right.

@TheGreatDuck, I forgot to tag you . . .

that's ok @Shaun

I do agree that multiple questions is usually bad

but in that situation it looks like subparts of a homework question

given the small answer it would seem that they are not really individual questions

@ParamanandSing @BrevanEllefsen @HansLundmark @Rebellos @RRL Please reconsider the possibility to reopen the OP after the editing and improvements by the asker.

@gimusi I don't think they are pingable here.

@ArnaudD. Why? Haw can ping them? Thanks

They are not pingable because they don't come to this chatroom (as far as I know). I don't know if pinging them on the question would work for all them, but it should work at least for those who commented or edited the question.

@gimusi You can check whether a user is pingable using @username in a given chatroom like this: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/pingable/2165 But probably the easier way is to check whether the usernames are offered in autocomplete.

Some posts on meta where you can read more on this: Does ping work in chat with no autocompletion? and Does a direct reply to a message in chat create a notification, no matter what age the message is?

Of course, since this specific situation is related to reopening - it does not matter who votes to reopen, it is not necessary that the same users that closed the questions are also the users who vote to reopen.

@MartinSleziak But how can submit the question to their attention without using comments in the OP. Is it possible to discuss the reopening here with them?

BTW this specific question is at the moment in the reopen review queue. It is the question 3018333: Find the limit of the expression $\lim_{x\to 0}\left(\frac{\sin x}{\arcsin x}\right)^{1/\ln(1+x^2)}$

@MartinSleziak Thanks for the information. Bye

@gimusi If a user used chat at least once, you can invite them to a specific chatroom: How do I invite a user to chat?

And as mentioned above, if a user talked at least once in this room it is possible to ping them: a) using @username if they were recently in this room; b) using a direct reply to one of their messages in the room.

So yes, it is technically possible. It is a separate question to which extent it is appropriate.

But I take it that you prefer that I leave now. Judging from the message: "Thanks for the information. Bye"

In case you need some advice on some stuff works in chat, feel free to ping me in my room. And I suppose that Math Meta chat would be a suitable room for such inquiries, too.

@MartinSleziak Is it technically possible to invite them here? Sorry, I can't see how.

@gimusi Since this is more about explaining how chat works and not really related to the topic of this room, let us take it elsewhere.

@Shaun Also dumped here.

@amWhy @JoséCarlosSantos @CarlMummert: Please note the above twinner.

@user21820 I've voted to delete it. There's only one more vote missing.

@JoséCarlosSantos Please vote on the question linked by Shaun as well, as it's the same.

Thanks!

@user21820 Done.

@Shaun By the way, heheh, you should have suggested the asker post their great proof to viXra.

Or better still, "Chaos, Solitons & Fractals".

(In case anyone doesn't realize, I had my sarcasm switch on for the above two comments.)

Thanks @Did!

@Shaun Gone; unpinning.

bog number, looks good?!, HEXAGN.

I need to know, how can I find all ... thanks.

Hello mates, I saw I was pinged

What seems to be the issue ?

@Rebellos gimusi just wanted to let you know that this question had been edited, and to suggest that you consider reopening it.

Just checked, seems a ton better than the initial one. Voted for reopeniong

Thanks for the heads up!

For deletion: D1, D2, D3.

@Rebellos Thanks a lot! Bye

Any chance we can close math.stackexchange.com/q/3018547 ? The question is answered in comments, and the poster left the realm of mathematics in order to avoid accepting the outcome. At the very least, the question is unmotivated and ambiguous.

@AndrésE.Caicedo Indeed. Very common from people who don't know logic: Ban all sentences that lead to contradiction!

@AndrésE.Caicedo the user's account should be nuked from orbit for thart behavior

wow

rude

@AndrésE.Caicedo To be honest, I don't have the expertise to vote on that question one way or the other. For instance, I have no idea what the symbol $\vdash$ is supposed to mean. :)

On the other hand, the user's behaviour is not something that I can endorse.

@XanderHenderson we're voting to close on the basis that the user is rude and doesn't deserve the privilege of having it open.

I think

@TheGreatDuck Hmm I don't see any actual rude comment from the asker on that thread.

I got to go

@user21820 read between the lines

@TheGreatDuck I don't think that is yet needed.

@TheGreatDuck Even if I agreed with you that the user was "rude" in comments, this is not sufficient reason to close a question.

Questions should be judged on their quality. Rude comments can be flagged.

@TheGreatDuck Can you be more explicit? Of course it is impolite to pretend to know better than a logician ("your formula is not a natural formula. So it is to be excluded from the above rule") without any actual knowledge of logic, but other than that I don't see any explicit rudeness. Can you pinpoint a comment that is unacceptable?

The behaviour that I don't like is the unwillingness to engage with the comments that others are making.

Hey folks. I think we may need another moderator election. For the last six weeks we've been effectively working with only "six" mods, all of whose time is quite restricted. I say this in part because after the last election, a moderator resigned. We don't know the whereabouts of a formerly and reliably present moderator daily. And two current moderators - if a quiz were given to users to "name your moderators on Math.SE" - would not be recognized by a majority of site users.

And if a quiz were given to those two current mods, about current events on this site, they'd likely fail.

@XanderHenderson (Follow link back to your post), and others!! One more close vote needed here.

@JoséCarlosSantos Looks like they've all been deleted.

@amWhy I have provided the needed vote.

Thanks, @JoséCarlosSantos

@amWhy Concerning the moderators, some weeks ago I saw the list of the current ones and I got surprised with the names that I saw there which were totally new to me.

@JoséCarlosSantos some of them have changed their handle, which is confusing sometimes.

@JoséCarlosSantos That's understandable. A few mods keep a very very low profile; once elected a mod there's very little required of one to stay a mod.

@AndrésE.Caicedo That applies to one mod only: formerly moderator known as "mixedmath" who changed to using their real name: math.stackexchange.com/users/9754/davidlowryduda.

@XanderHenderson closed!

@amWhy Thanks. I think that was the right call.

Not an answer

@TheSimpliFire The question itself ought to go.

@amWhy Yes. 1 more delete vote.

1C, 2D, 3C, 4D

@amWhy I have posted some stats which are related to moderators and visible also to regular user in Math Meta Chat. (I guess this is more on-topic in that room.) Of course, moderators have access to data which we do not see and are probably better equipped to get some relevant insights into how the moderating is going.

@MartinSleziak Thanks, @MartinSleziak!

@JoséCarlosSantos hello, nice to meet you! :-)

Ah, given the preceding comment I figure we were not all unknown quantities.

@quid You surely are not. :-)

@quid who are you, anyway? :P

I have asked for the asker to provide some additional context in their question. They have not. I'm not spending more time on this question, and have voted to close.

@TheSimpliFire 2D and 4D are gone.

@XanderHenderson Just don't take away 3D, or we'll all be disoriented!

I was very careful to avoid that. :P

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in title (65): Integrate ∫(secx+tanx)‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾√ ⋅secxdx by Nixon San Buenaventura on math.SE

@amWhy hehe

Tomorrow is ... ... ...

... Friday!!!

For those interested, This post is up for deletion.

^^^^^^^^^^^^ @Did, @JoséCarlosSantos, @AndrésE.Caicedo, @user21820 (Note the recent vote to reopen; it is currently in the reopen review queue.)

D1. D2. D3.

D4. D5. D6.

D7. D8. D9.

D10. D11. D12.

About the candidates for D: deletion above.... The first three posts were closed yesterday (D1-D3). The rest were closed 2 days ago.