@MartinR: I checked their mobile version. Maybe it is specific to my setup, but the raw query input is hidden when the keyboard app appears. So I can type the query and press enter to search, but while typing the query I can't see what is being typed. I will stick to the desktop version for now. I don't see any problem there.
Anyway I think the overall cost of searching via approach0 is less than the effort involved in typing a new well framed answer. Therefore even for users on mobile devices, it makes sense to do a search before answering.
@ParamanandSingh , @amWhy and @XanderHenderson Thanks for deleting those 2 questions. There's a third related one which is closed and for which I just added a second delete vote. Since lulu's comment mentioned at least 4 such questions, there may be other ones which are not yet closed or deleted, but I haven't done a careful check of all questions around that time period to make sure.
Are the contests worth putting so much effort in cheating? At least for this question I am certain that one could solve it honestly with much less effort.
@ParamanandSingh Could you vote to reopen this question? I've added in the additional detail had been missing, but I don't have the reputation to reopen it myself.
Upon reading about some properties of numerators and denominators in a textbook called Continued Fractions (here, chapter 2.3), I was unable to understand the following transmutation of the expression (circled in red in the image link), and highlighted red here:
2.3 Relations between convergents...
@user400188 I'll vote to reopen, I think it's been improved a fair bit, the addition of the statement and proof with the issues marked in red are for me, a good enough indicator of what is required. It is worth wondering if the previous questions addressed this concern or not.
@ParamanandSingh Actually, I'm kind of a little taken aback by the first answer. The answerer says that it's a question for interpretation so no work of the OP is required. Your take on this?
@ParamanandSingh Yes, the OP told me it's been set up to reward me. Honestly, though, going through Cornel for three days, I spent nearly six hours on that answer, because Cornel's method was too difficult but I had to modify his tools, make things simpler, find the right exercises, and repeatedly verify small details again and again. It was quite difficult, if anything I'm so happy with the response.
For me, when I spotted the recurrence and the multiple geometric references I knew I was on to something there. I'd class it in my top 50 answers on the site, not my best though.
You deserve it. Also the question on continued fraction is not so much interpretation, but rather clarifying some confusion of the asker. In particular the asker was under the impression that the notation for continued fraction consists only of integers.
@ParamanandSingh I also don't know if the effort put in is worth it, such as for a math contest. Nonetheless, there's one more question that is the same as a previous one that was deleted (your vote being the third one). I added a comment which I hope will keep anybody from answering, plus I also flagged it for moderator attention, and stated this in the Math Mod's chatroom here.
@JohnOmielan: this is really frustrating, how many times we need to delete same repeated questions. I hope your flag is handled by mods with a strong action.
@JohnOmielan: I hope people take note of your comment and refrain from answering that
@Euler2 Your golden rule : don't answer PSQs. They are the easiest kind of questions to spot which don't fit the site rules.
You are not breaking rules by answering PSQs. But you are sending the message that "PSQs are entertained on this site, and will be answered" by answering them. So that's why we discourage answering of PSQs, @Euler2.
@ParamanandSingh I agree it's frustrating & I also hope the flag is appropriately handled by the mods. FYI, the OP of this latest question stated in a comment that "IB past paper ^^ but thanks anyways". This is consistent with the comment by the OP in another question where they said "Part of an IB past paper question. I have my math hl exam tomorrow so it would be great if you could help".
However, I, at least, find it hard to believe that there would be so many closely related questions, from one or several users, in such a relatively short time here if these questions are actually just from a past IB past paper.
@Euler2 this is correct-- actually, one of our main policy goals is to prioritize attracting users who are invested enough to stick around and become part of the community. Willingness to read the rules is a good first filter in that selection process.
that said, I do agree that the "How To Ask A Good Question" page could use a summarized version on a help center page. Meta threads can be confusing for new people.
@AlexanderGruber Thank you, that was a very measured reply. I wish to add something : it is not that we are unforgiving. For users of low reputation who are willing to listen, we are open for feedback, @Euler2. I've seen your history, and you are really making yourself a role model for new users. Perhaps you may want to share how you became such a role model?
nah I don't think I am making myself a role model. I just do research on some question which I can't answer, collect all the facts, and ask a question on the site
@Euler2 Really? Well, here's the good news : the amount you do is enough to make you a role model. That surely reflects well on you, but for all the newbies out there, we should be holding up some posts of yours and asking them to read it, and learn from it. I'm sorry, but I genuinely think that your posts are of good quality,
And if you think the amount you do is very little, then we should be expecting the new users to also do that much. Well, apparently not, since this came an hour ago.
Any opinions of whether to close Logarithmically Convex Functions Characterization as a duplicate of Characterization of log-convexity or not? The newer question is about convex functions in n dimensions, and the older question is about the one-dimensional case. However, the proofs are almost verbatim identical. – (Disclosure: I answered the older question.)
@TeresaLisbon I now voted to close math.stackexchange.com/q/4102149/42969 as a duplicate, after OP accepted one of the answers (which implies that using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem is an acceptable solution to them). The duplicate was confirmed by OP, so this is settled now.
@MartinR I think this makes sense, duplicate closure can be consider
@MartinR Now it can be closed as a duplicate, although I still don't like the fact the answers came in. I take this as personal bias towards the situation, however, so I will backtrack a little and agree with the closure at this point.
@TeresaLisbon I really dislike the phrase "according to me..." in that context. As if a mathematical result is, like, just your opinion, man. You can't, like, prove it. Man.
@XanderHenderson Exactly, the arrogance of the user is visible there. Do you think it is arrogance, or it is a reaction to a disbelief at the fact that a popular video could be wrong about something?
@Peter Ignorance based rudeness with arrogance = insulting, because the asker clearly has not read and understood the proof, but is full of themselves to the point that they actually believe they found an error.
@TeresaLisbon Honestly, I think it is a language / communication issue. What they mean to say, I think, is "My computations led to the result..." or "According to my computations, the result is..."
Essentially, "this is the answer I got". But the phrasing "according to me" sets my teeth on edge.
@XanderHenderson I thought so as well, but if you reflect on the comments later, there is a slight unwillingness (which may be natural ,arguably) at seeing that the video is wrong, because it's a kind of setback that you spend time watching a video to get your concepts right, and then find out they're all mixed up!
IMO videos that go for geometric explanations of school concepts have to be very careful, but then again careful videos don't get views unless they are truly exceptional in a different way (graphics or something) so everybody goes for the pop science options, and we bear the brunt!
@TeresaLisbon The problem , not only with math videos , is that the popularity is not at all correlated to the quality , and if , rather in the sense : "the more popular , the worse" and vice versa. This is a phenomenon sadly occuring very often. Just take a look at the contents of the best-sellers.
@Peter Yeah, honestly. To be fair, everybody thrives on sensationalism, I mean come on, why do contest questions or inequality questions here with no context get up votes? They are sensational to read, pleasing to the eye and hard to believe. People posting such questions think like media outlets would.
@Peter I don't think it's a perfect correlation. One need to examine the source. There are some professors of math, at notable universities who manage to pull of some incredible videos, often born from a popular on line lecture. But yes, I suspect there is a positive correlation <1, but not by much.
Disclaimer: amWhy resists sweeping generalizations, but is readily agreeable that there are clear trends, but occasionally, a few, who buck the trend. ;D
@amWhy This is a channel called doubtnut. Their aims are result-oriented, and they spend minimal effort in explanation and maximal effort on formulas. This wasn't the right channel to view. In fact, MSE was the right place to view!
Exceptions confirm the rule : In the past I actually watched many popular and very good comedy broadcasts. But those have unfortunately become very rare. Today there are much more cabaret artists than comedians , cabaret is rarely funny because the background is depressing. We would need much more comedy , in particular in this depressing time dominated by corona.
@quid I would like to invite some colleagues of mine, social science researchers, to do controlled studies examining you.tube videos on math concepts, along with a panel of mathematicians as evaluators, to measure the level of accuracy (or lack there of) of such videos.)
@Peter You are one viewer, who is already biased. Until you assemble a broader study, greatly widening the viewers/judges, at most you can claim: "this is how I experience it." Else you fall into the chasm of users on this site who are convinced they I right, based on their point of view.
@Peter I.e., your comment remains an opinion, unless there is sufficient scientific evidence, though double blind controlled studies. But everyone needs to start with a hypothesis when embarking on a study, which then confirms, qualifies, are defies the hypothesis. So this world needs humble hypothesizers to sense trends, but are humble enough to to suggest the "trend" be studied.
@amWhy If there is a study on "what is the impact of math videos as far as MSE is concerned" then I'd love to be a part of it. I like it that you are looking at the bigger picture, but my opinions are soured by the fact that I've rarely had a person come to me and say "this video was satisfactory" on MSE. I'm sure I have a biased view in this regard, because there are good videos, but...
there's also the question of finding them , selecting the best one. And there's also the problem that if a video actually worked, then why would someone tell me? Perhaps that's created all the bias, I don't know the success stories!
After all, there's a reason why people watch the channel. They deliver. Questions may persist for individuals, but the collective profits.
@TeresaLisbon I agree, fully. The videos that come here are most often "too good to be true" or else challenge what students have learned. But that itself is a biased sample: students who come here confused by a video which challenges what they have learned, or is Crank based. My point is, is that the videos called into question on math.se are not representative of all math videos. How many lessons from MIT OCR videos, or Khan Academy videos, cause students as much difficulty as ...
outlier/cranky videos than anyone, any wanna be, can post. The message today, just like thirty years ago, to students, is Consider the source. The sources have changed over the decades, but learners need to still be vigilant in studies "consider the source" of their claims.
My experience with math videos (in general) is bad, but yes, this is of course only my opinion, I am pretty sure that many people would disagree. What is a "good" video ? Everyone has other criterions. It is hard to make a study of what is so subjective as what is "good". Usually two people will have three different minds about something like this.
@Peter With respect to mathematics, there is the criterion of "accuracy". But I understand. And I was not dismissing you; It is a question worth investigation.
What I can say is that wikipedia articles and pdf-articles were much more helpful to ME than math videos. Other people may have made different experiences.
@amWhy Great point. MSE gets only that proportion of the videos you mention. There should definitely be a study done to verify that math videos are correct and weed the bad ones out. One thing I know is that a great video source can provide geometric insight better than any textbook can. So videos can play a role in math education, but it's about finding the right ones, which you can't from taking a sample on MSE, I think.
The "non-visit rebound PSQ phenomena" is getting truer by the day. A user today has returned to the site after a span of three days, and has answered five questions, three of which were PSQs. Yesterday it was a different user, eight answers, six to PSQs. The rebound phenomena , a result of true desperation, is a sign that reputation is really driving people!
The idea is that not being on the site for an extended period seems to spur them to make up for lost time, which they do by addressing the low-hanging fruit. Then , once the urge is fulfilled, they go back to their usual routine, which is of a fewer number of PSQs answered on average. The answers are shorter on average as well! It's a reality.
I second @Peter regarding quality of math videos out there. There are some which try to make math fun/sensational, others try to dumb down and finally recorded lectures. None of that is good for self study.
@TeresaLisbon: when I was in high school (around 1995) I used to watch the UGC programme on Doordarshan. In particular there was an episode which described mathematical induction and gave a proof of Euler formula (faces, edges, vertices of polyhedra) using induction. None of the popular videos on youtube now match that quality
@ParamanandSingh Whether it is the NCERT textbooks, or the recent government-sponsored videos for supporting CBSE students, which come as programs that are aired on DD National (or sometimes on regional DD channels) , I have always been happy with the Indian government's (not current, all-time) efforts in promoting and studying mathematics.
I have not seen a book better than NCERT for the Indian context, and not seen better content than those videos for studies. But this whole idea of education privatization, and the success of Byju, Vedantu and so on means that people are now putting up video after video after video, without much research. That is a problem!
When the focus is on quantity, there's no point of expecting quality!
There have even been sites that post collected Q and A from math.se, without attribution. It really is very sad, especially when such sites require payment via subscription, to review.
With all that darkness behind us, we stand as the protectors, as the role models, as the ones who want to make a difference. Clap for yourselves, and good night to all!
@quid: Please review, I responded, but perhaps it was to much, to the following comment:
I thought this website was there to help people, but clearly not this is the second time someone criticizes me and not my way of asking. I apologis for not knowing the rules of this site yet. I was edditing this post and i had more to ask so i thought by making it into two pices insed of one long would make it easier to understand but, In my recent post i got one downvote that made me unable to post my secone "page" i did not now that punichment had ben delt to me untill it was to late. — Sir Kermit1 hour ago
@quid This was the question, which I requested here as one that needs to be closed:
@JoséCarlosSantos Thanks. Yes, you are right. I was just disturbed by the OPs response to closure, reflected in my initial post immediately above. But I think you are right; I'd best invest in users willing to improve. Thanks again!
@XanderHenderson ;D I just don't get, sometimes, how askers feel indignant for what they consider "critical" feedback. As though expecting this site to be a "do my work for me" site. But it happens all the time. :(
@XanderHenderson You're not missing anything. It is all over the place, and as you noticed, a moving target. I'm not sure whether to close as "needs focus", or what. But it is certainly an exemplar as to why high votes do not necessarily correlate with good questions. (Ditto wrt answers).
@Xander FYI, I edited this post on meta, to remove the reference from the OP's assumption that the accounts were Indian. Just check on the link and edit history. But I don't know that I should have before alerting mods. I'm very uncomfortable when users come close to targeting any specified group of people,with no suggestion from the links that it was anything but on assumption on the part of the OP.
Sorry, @Xander, I do not want to flood you with tasks. Basically I'd like to know if I should have left the OP's question alone, and flagged it, or if handling it via an edit was okay. No immediate need for a response.
It might be a valid concern, the linked posts there, hence I edited out what I found to be an inappropriate assumption as to who posted the identified posts.
Three different linear systems of equations
