CURED - 2023-04-05

« first day (4101 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (690 days later) »

KReiser

01:36

close - seeking personal advice

1 hour later…

Arctic Char

02:45

C (Duplicate)

13 hours later…

KReiser

16:07

close - picture-only question

(also low context)

3 hours later…

gist076923

18:49

So about the question I posted yesterday (math.stackexchange.com/questions/4672588/…), that question got deleted by the author. I think that it's an interesting question. I do think it's too low quality if it was simply undeleted (as it does need some clarification), so I'm thinking about reposting an edited version as an Q&A style question, as I do know how to answer it. Thoughts?

By posted, I mean posted here. I'm not the author of the question

gist076923

19:27

math.stackexchange.com/questions/4673490/… I have posted the Q&A style question

2 hours later…

Arctic Char

21:03

@gist076923 It would be better if you also provide more context. You mentioned that it is of interest in combinatorics, may I know how (does that expression showed up in some combinatoric problem?) As of now your post still looks like a PSQ.

gist076923

21:28

"As of now your post stills looks like a PSQ". In response I made an edit to give an overview about how I solved it.

"it would be better to provide more context" i don't have more context than someone posted it before and I found it an interesting problem

"you mentioned it was of interest to combinatorics" I said that "I believe it's a useful question for those interested in combinatorics like myself" I don't think the sum itself is useful, but I believe people might find it a nice problem for honing skills. plus, stirling numbers of the second kind are inherently fascinating to me

Xander Henderson

22:03

The original question was a problem statement question which had been closed for lack of context before the author deleted it.

The precedent that you seem to be trying to establish is that if anyone sees a problem statement question and finds it interesting, then all they have to do is repost that question and say that they found it "interesting" as context.

Which further implies that a question of the form "PSQ. I think this is interesting." would be an acceptable type of question.

Personally, I am really not comfortable with that.

Also, every question on the site is supposed to be "Q&A style", so I really don't understand what your title is supposed to be conveying.

Mike Earnest

22:36

@XanderHenderson What would be the proper way for gist76923 to ask the question? It was inherently an interesting question, because you can verify with a Python program that the function always outputs an integer, but there is no (obvious) way to prove it is always an integer.

Xander Henderson

@MikeEarnest "You can verify this with a python program" is not context that I see in the question.

Also, I left a comment below the question:

With an eye to context, you say "I believe it's a useful question for those interested in combinatorics". Why? Why would this problem be interesting to a person interested in combinatorics. I'm an analyst. I want to know if and where a series converges (and, maybe, to what). When I am working with a series, it generally comes from somewhere (e.g. maybe I am trying to find the singularities of some fractal zeta function). In order for me to find a series interesting, I would like to know where it came from and how it might be useful to understand its properties. — Xander Henderson ♦ 20 mins ago

Mike Earnest

So, if the user had included a Python program and claimed that it verified the hypothesis for small integers, that would be sufficient context?

Your comment seems to discuss a personal preference on your part. I believe pure math equations can be inherently interesting, even if they don't come form somewhere. Patterns are cool.

Xander Henderson

@MikeEarnest Probably.

@MikeEarnest Look, I am a pure mathematician. To the extent that I have time for research anymore, I study differential operators on sets with fractal properties. But even the purest wankery is motivated by something, at some level. Nothing comes out of the blue.

So, yes, patterns are interesting, but I see no evidence in that question that the asker observed any patterns. It is just a problem statement.

Someone who hasn't played with the problem at all should be given enough context to know why it might be interesting. For example, it is not even immediately obvious to me that the terms being added together are not all, themselves, integers (again, a little thought shows you that they aren't, but the asker should be making that point).

Mike Earnest

I am sorry. I was frustrated when I made that comment, and I have now deleted it.

I am editing the question so it has appropriate context and meets MSE standards, so this issue can be put to rest.

Mike Earnest

23:10

Okay, I just edited the question. I tried my best to make clear why I found the problem interesting, to a way that person not deeply familiar with combinatorics might appreciate.

In the case you found my edits to contain sufficient context, I would appreciate you deleting your comments on the post, @XanderHenderson

« first day (4101 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (690 days later) »

all rooms