« first day (5 days earlier)      last day (4270 days later) » 

01:00
@AndrewSalmon
@anorton
01:42
@PeterTamaroff resolved
01:56
@PeterTamaroff Another vote-to-close to get it off the unanswered queue: math.stackexchange.com/questions/389935/…
("If you can imagine an entire book being written about it, it's probably too broad.")
02:19
For this one, the OP said that he didn't want help anymore at the end of the comment stream: math.stackexchange.com/questions/342517/…
02:30
we have 6 machines the lifetime of each ~ exp(-ln(.7)=0.35) if one machine fail it is reapair the next day .What is the probability that some particular day NO machine work?? ./So far I got : If the lifetime is grater than the perticular day the probability = 0 I also think to separate the even days of the not even /
Is this the right path ??
@Gmath This room is not intended for asking math questions. If you want an answer, I recommend going to the main math room or asking your question on the main site.
ok thanks
03:21
@Lord_Farin Do you think the room name should be made more descriptive? We had multiple visitors who inferred from the title that the room is where answers are given. Something like Review of unanswered questions...
Two good comments, but an answer is still needed to #120584.
03:51
@user79365 If there were a way to star an answer without sending it to the RSS feed, I would.
 
2 hours later…
06:39
@JulianKuelshammer Resolved.
07:23
call for CW answer: #66817
07:36
@JulianKuelshammer Answered.
@Lord_Farin resolved
07:49
room topic changed to The Crusade of Answers: Our menace: the Unanswered queue. Our goal: total annihilation! NB. This room is not for asking maths questions. (no tags)
room topic changed to The Crusade of Answers: Our menace: the Unanswered queue. Our goal: total annihilation! (NB. This room is not for asking maths questions.) (no tags)
@user79365 Meh. I've added a note in the room description.
call for CW answer (original comment-answer by Gone): #174510
@JulianKuelshammer Answered.
@Lord_Farin you are fast :-)
@JulianKuelshammer At times :). But I'm out now, thesis calls. Also, 23770 just a few moments ago!
 
3 hours later…
11:09
A Data.SE query for wiki answers to nonetheless unanswered questions.
2
11:56
Users with a few minutes and votes to spare are invited to put in their favorite tag...
 
4 hours later…
16:02
CW answer posted to #291337.
 
5 hours later…
21:16
@AndrewSalmon It took nontrivial effort, but an answer is now present: #412812.
@Lord_Farin Wow, a lot more than I thought it would take.
Sorry for putting you through that.
@AndrewSalmon I could have used handwavery instead, but -- as I state in the last paragraph -- it may help people appreciate the standard methods of mathematical proof-writing.
(And when I was half-way through, there was no way I was going to stop.)
@Lord_Farin Part 2, step 7 should read $\langle x,y \rangle \in F \to \langle x,y \rangle \in G$.
@AndrewSalmon Fixed, thanks.
And step 9 follows by $Y \in F \to \exists x,y: Y = \langle x,y \rangle \land \langle x,y \rangle \in F$
$\to \exists x,y: Y = \langle x,y \rangle \land \langle x,y \rangle \in G$
$\to Y \in G$
So just substitution $5,8$ actually.
12 follows from $9$ immediately, just universal generalization and the definition of subset.
21:26
@AndrewSalmon I know, but I intentionally cut the corner of PropCalc. As for 12, I still needed to discharge 1. (By no means I claim that the proof is optimal.)
Call for close votes #142737
Comment converted to answer for #97520

« first day (5 days earlier)      last day (4270 days later) »