« first day (4433 days earlier)      last day (111 days later) » 

1:54 AM
@XanderHenderson As soon as I cast the last deletion vote on the question, one of the answers shows an undeletion vote. Out of curiosity: (1) How come such an undeletion vote could have been cast before the deletion took place? (2) If the answer gets 3 undeletion votes, will the question and the answer be undeleted?
 
2:34 AM
0
Q: Convergence to 9 in Iterative Functions Inspired by the Collatz Conjecture

José LuisInspired by the Collatz Conjecture, I have explored a variant that introduces an additional element x, altering the operation for odd numbers and exploring convergence towards the numbers 36-18-9. Proposition: We define the iterative function $f(n)$ for $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and a parameter $x \in \...

 
 
4 hours later…
6:57 AM
Wrong answer, please delete: math.stackexchange.com/a/4873406/42969
 
 
2 hours later…
9:05 AM
Wrong answer, one final delete vote needed: math.stackexchange.com/a/4873756/42969
 
 
3 hours later…
12:19 PM
Questions like this has been asked so many times, but surprisingly such type is not listed in List of Generalisations of Common Questions.
 
 
2 hours later…
@Ѕᴀᴀᴅ The answer was deleted and undeleted a couple of times (by the author) a couple of times before the question was ultimately deleted.
 
2:35 PM
 
@XanderHenderson Thanks for the input.
 
0
Q: Hybrid between $5x+1$ and $7x+1$ that is probably convergent

Py PyBoth the $5x+1$ and $7x+1$ variant of the Collatz sequence are conjectured to have large number of divergent trajectory. Here, i combined the two. As always, when you encounter even $x$, you apply $x\rightarrow x/2$, but if you encounter odd $x$, you have the option of applying either $x \rightar...

 
 
7 hours later…
9:51 PM
 
 
1 hour later…
10:52 PM
Dv/D dupe of big FAQ with high-rep cherry picking, nothing novel
 
@BillDubuque how is this a duplicate?
I think its a bit of too much stretch to call question a duplicate because it follows from two similar questions
 
11:23 PM
@Jakobian It is no "stretch" by any means. Rather, as explained in the closing comment if follows immediately (and obviously) from the two linked basic results.
 
Lets see what others think, for example, what do you think about this @XanderHenderson ?
 
11:42 PM
@Jakobian Why do you think it is good to let users repeat basic proofs ad infinitum? Allowing such destroys all hope of the site functioning efficiently as a repository of answers since it makes it difficult if not impossible for users to locate the "best" answers by search.
 

« first day (4433 days earlier)      last day (111 days later) »