« first day (3487 days earlier)      last day (80 days later) » 

 
4 hours later…
@TheSimpliFire It's gone.
 
@JosΓ©CarlosSantos I didn't realise I cast the last delete vote :P
 
 
1 hour later…
8:55 AM
C/D Also note the comments.
 
 
4 hours later…
12:29 PM
 
1:03 PM
Almost no one is patient enough to read the comment under a long and fantastic β€œproof” that shows the proof is actually incorrect: math.stackexchange.com/a/4212085
@ArcticChar Only D10 remains.
 
@Saad gone
 
@Peter Thanks!
 
@Saad accepted , upvoted , bountied , the full program. What is incorrect ? The answer ?
 
@Peter Yes, the answer. See my comment.
 
@Saad apart from downvoting, we can currently do nothing.
 
1:13 PM
@Peter The author has shown intention to fix up, so I'll wait for a day.
Though it's not easy to fix it at the level of 10th grade.
 
1:35 PM
One more vote needed: D1, D2, D3
For closure: C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7
For deletion: D4, D5, D6,
D7, D8, D9, D10, D11, D12
 
@Saad D12 with an upvoted answer !
@Saad C2 a case of EoQS - violation
 
@Peter Mods seem to only consider especially prolific cases.
 
1:52 PM
@Saad In fact, we cannot be satisfied with the mod's handling with EoQS. Moreover, the mods refuse any kind of transparency , making it impossible to verify whether EoQS is handled properly.
 
 
2 hours later…
@TeresaLisbon Open for deletion.
@Peter Open for deletion; two more delete votes needed.
 
4:00 PM
@user21820 D3 is particular annoying.
 
@Peter particularly ;P
 
4:17 PM
@amWhy @Peter it is no more annoying now!
 
@ParamanandSingh ;D
 
@ParamanandSingh Thank you! I expected we need $5$ delete-votes.
 
Luckily only 4 were needed.
It appears only D3 was left for me. Rest others are deleted already.
 
4:54 PM
Any others interested in deleting this meta post? One delete vote needed. The question adds nothing to the site.
 
5:26 PM
I feel like closing this as a duplicate of this. They are not exact duplicate, but all answers there can be posted in the new post as an answer (and someone just did)
 
@ArcticChar I've cast the first close vote as a duplicate.
 
@amWhy Thanks. I have made up my mind and voted to close it as "needs more focus". I feel like "Opinion based" (what is a conjecture that "like Fermat's last theorem"?) also work.
 
@ArcticChar Indeed! Thanks!
@ArcticChar, @Saad, @Joe, @JoséCarlosSantos, @JyrkiLahtonen, @JitendraSingh, @lonestudent, and @everyone: Please know you are welcome to join us in the Cafe, while we aim for a long list of words, four or more letters, that can be formed from letters in INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION!
Note: I've named users here possibly interested in the word search, and others I pinged in the Cafe....
@Xander We'd love to have you participate in the Cafe, as well!
 
6:25 PM
Yet another COLLATZ proof attempt?? math.stackexchange.com/questions/4213070/… It's closed, but with downvotes, it can be deleted.
 
6:43 PM
@user21820 ^^^^^^
 
7:32 PM
This question lacks research effort. For example, a quick google search brings up this Math SE thread which mentions Conway proving that a generalization is undecidable. Another quick google scholar search brings up this paper. Just looking at the graphs in the paper and the comments about the "visible kink" would strongly suggest that any such naive attempt is nothing more than naive. — user21820 17 secs ago
Proof that it is a bad question ^_^
 
@user21820 Can you or Teresa add a downvote, so the post can be deleted?
 
@amWhy Can't add more than one vote, unfortunately.
 
@amWhy I'll do it right now.
 
@user21820 Wasn't sure who else voted to close. Thanks!
 
Incidentally, I'm have almost zero knowledge about Collatz, so my being able to find those stuff is really just a matter of using google. =)
 
7:39 PM
We can now delete this question.
I've put my vote in
 
@TeresaLisbon One more vote needed.
 
Great!
 
@TeresaLisbon Thanks!
Gone! Thanks @TeresaLisbon, @user21820
 
Good to know, I was seeing that it had been on the site only for a short time, but it needed to go anyway.
There'd have been no way to rephrase it as an on topic question.
 
7:42 PM
@user21820 Start working on your challenge to fine an anagramatic phrase from "International Space Session", and no one yet has answering the challenge question yet!
 
C: another proof asking for review of proof of the conjecture.
 
 
2 hours later…
10:02 PM
@ArcticChar It's closed now.
 
10:15 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Few unique characters in body (94): Computation of a special $\infty / \infty$ form limit ✏️ by Linge on math.SE
 
10:29 PM
And yet another Collatz Conjecture question!!. Help, @Xander :(
 
Collatz 19
 
Hi everybody into the chat.
Just a curiosity: Have I done a mistake or mistakes for my answer?
-1
A: $\lim_{n\to \infty} [((n+1)(n+2)(n+3)(n+4)-2n)^{1/n} -n]$

SebastianoYou can write, in the meantime, $$\lim_{n\to \infty} [((n+1)(n+2)(n+3)(n+4)-2n)^{1/n} -n]=$$$$\color{orange}{- \lim_{n \to \infty} n + \lim_{n \to \infty} e^{\ln{\left(\left(- 2 n + \left(n + 1\right) \left(n + 2\right) \left(n + 3\right) \left(n + 4\right)\right)^{\frac{1}{n}} \right)}}}$$ Consi...

@JoséCarlosSantos Hi, prof.. Excuse for this advice. You see some mistakes for my answer? Thank you very much.
 
The problem is not your answer it is what you answered.
 
@vitamind I have not understood your comment.
 
84
Q: Enforcement of Quality Standards

Xander HendersonMath SE has a long-standing policy regarding what constitutes a Good Question. The policy is intended to ensure that the collection of questions and answers here is of high quality, is searchable, and is generally of use as a long-lasting reference. Historically, we have tried to deal with low-q...

 
10:39 PM
@Sebastiano Just like all answerers, you need to stay clear from answering problem statement or poor quality questions. Just because you know an answer, doesn't mean you should post it! We don't need answerers enabling askers of "do my work for me" questions, by answering them!
 
@Sebastiano Please do not answer low qualtiy questions or PSQs (problem-statement questions) i.e. questions without attempts and/or context.
 
@vitamind So it's just a problem of good quality? Boh. I've made an effort but for me, good or bad quality in some circumstances are just subjective aspects.
 
@Sebastiano It's not about your answer, I can see the effort you put in. It is about the question, which is low quality. Please do not answer such questions.
 
@Sebastiano If you cannot use discretion in terms of what you choose to answer, then perhaps you need to take some to better understand the policy @vitamind linked, and the reason, even necessity, of you not encouraging, nor any answerer encouraging, askers posting questions with no context.
 
@amWhy @vitamind In all honesty, I didn't respond right away because I thought the user was taking a test. And if you see my profile and my answers this doesn't always happen. Ok I won't answer the low quality questions. I close answers where there is no effort. you can see all my closures.
 
10:44 PM
@Sebastiano Thanks. We appreciate your help in this.
 
In addition to the fact that the question you have answered is of low-quality, I really don't think that your answer is pedagogically sound. You begin by separating the limit into two limits in order to obtain something like $\infty - \infty$. You then analyze the two terms separately, and draw your conclusions from there.
This is dangerous, particularly for students just learning how to deal with limits.
 
@amWhy @vitamind OK. It was instinctive for me to respond. But I'm not going to answer low quality questions. Greetings to you. And best regards.
 
Either use explicit asymptotics (e.g. with Landau's notation), or pull out other tricks (in this case, I would expect that the student would have been expected to take the logarithm of the limit, use the continuity of the logarithm to pass the log through the limit, then apply some algebra tricks).
I am also highly suspicious of arguments which start with "Plotting the sequence of general term ... you can observe that...".
Technological aids are great for building intuition, bu are generally insufficiently rigorous in the kinds of situations in which this exercise is posed (of course, we don't know the conditions under which this exercise was posed, as the author has not provided such context).
That's a (-1) from me, as well (for the reasons I've just outlined here).
 
@XanderHenderson I had no other ideas (here in Sicily when I have answered) we were at 44 degrees...And my head was smoking. Again I didn't know he was a student and it didn't even say that. I hope I remember your advice. My way of solving them are high school science; I couldn't use Landau's symbols.It doesn't matter about negative votes. But at least I have understood. Thanks for the clarification. I like the explanations. I will remove the answer.
 
11:01 PM
@amWhy Don't thank me I do what I can to better myself. I invite you to see my many closures for poor quality questions and also answers. This concept must apply to me as well.
 
@Sebastiano I'm aware of your contributions. Do not fret. And I do thank you for caring enough to listen, and learn, and for all your help over time. :-)
 
11:22 PM
@amWhy I'm electric by nature. ahahaahahhaha. I am Sicilian and my body temperature is high: I hope to go to sleep. Almost all day long with highs of 44 degrees. Now maybe we're near to 30°. Have a good rest.
 
@Sebastiano Sleep well.
 

« first day (3487 days earlier)      last day (80 days later) »