« first day (3429 days earlier)      last day (558 days later) » 

8:40 AM
Oct 26, 2018 at 8:15, by Martin Sleziak
From the tags mentioned in the above message, only , and exist at the moment.
Apart from , , the tags and are other tags named after a person.
February 2016 - created and then removed: mathoverflow.net/posts/231950/revisions
October 2016 - this post still has the tag: mathoverflow.net/posts/253188/revisions
2
Q: Elliptic functions and "complex multiplication"

Michael HardyI have before me a copy of "The Indian Mathematician Ramanujan", by G. H. Hardy (not actually related to me, as far as I know), which appeared in volume 44, number 3 (March 1937) of The American Mathematical Monthly, on pages 137‒155. One of the theorems of Ramanujan stated there is this: If...

 
2 hours later…
10:50 AM
@MartinSleziak Just to let you know, I'm in touch with zbMath about updating the information from their back-end, and with SE about also updating the front-end. The https issue is going to be resolved quickly, as a starter.
2
11:03 AM
@AsafKaragila IIRC you don't have an account on Meta Stack Exchange, right? So I assume, some of the SE staff will post an "official" response to that feature request once it's done.
@MartinSleziak Presumably.
I have to admit that I am surprised that it is going to be "resolved quickly" - but let's wait and see what that actually means.
I remember a response from SE mods that they're planning to look into something soon, and it ended up as several years. :-)
You're conflating the forces that are in action here.
Yes, you've mentioned that this depends probably more on zbMath than on the MathOverflow Inc.
It may take a month to get a revised formatting and some additional work through the SE hoops, but as far as changing the link and updating the information coming through the back-end, that is a few clicks for zbMath, especially the https issue.
11:07 AM
We'll see. Basically I reported the issue in the way it was supposed to be reported - so on my end, there's not much else to be done.
@MartinSleziak I somewhat disagree with that, but yes, on your end there's not much more to do.
Well, it's quite clear that our views about MO moderation and MO Inc. differ quite a lot.
Sure. My point is that the problem kinda had nothing to do with SE, and everything to do with MO's relationship with zbMath.
I have explicitly mentioned in that post that I can post it elsewhere if that's a better option - the response from a Meta Stack Exchange moderator was that this was a right place for the feature request.
@AsafKaragila Certainly it has something to do with SE - the is now part of Stack Exchange software.
What dark forces actually act in background - that's something mere mortals like me shouldn't know.
4
Again, I know, and I understand your and their confusion. But if you look into the reason why this is happening, you will see that this is something to do with the information coming back from zbMath.
I'm not saying you did anything wrong. Again.
5
I just think that had this been posted on meta.MO it would have been resolved before the holidays.
At the very least the http/s part.
11:12 AM
Lol! I have already mentioned my experience about time how quickly the MO moderator team responds to things.
I'd love to continue this chat, but it feels a bit pointless, and I do need to finish writing a grant proposal.
I'll let you know when things have been updated.
 
1 hour later…
12:13 PM
iecl.univ-lorraine.fr/~Pierre-Yves.Gaillard/DIVERS/… - I tried searching one, two possible versions in the Wayback Machine - but neither of them returned anything.
4
A: Examples of common false beliefs in mathematics

Pierre-Yves GaillardHere are two beliefs. I think everybody will agree that one of them, at least, is false. I adhere to the second one. Belief 1. The simplest way to compute the exponential $e^A$ of a complex square matrix $A$ is to use the Jordan decomposition. Belief 2. It's simpler and more efficient to use t...

 
6 hours later…
5:46 PM
Incidentally, how did you fix it? (I'm curious how to handle "invisible line breaks.") — Noah Schweber 39 secs ago
Yup, that's great, although I don't actually understand what you changed. — Noah Schweber 34 secs ago
@NoahSchweber If you wish to, we can continue in chat - so that we do not leave many comments here. But I didn't really do anything beyond removing a newline. — Martin Sleziak 14 secs ago
Here is a link to the revision history: mathoverflow.net/posts/438299/revisions
This is what I get if I click on the "source" of revision 2 and copy-paste the relevant part:
>! Let $X$ be the set of complete theories that satisfy "everything
is countable" and have unboundedly many $\alpha<\omega_1^L$
with $L_\alpha$ realising them. The theory of $L_{\omega_1^L}$ is one such theory, and we will be done if we prove that there are some others. Now $X$ is a definable class in $L_{\omega_1^L}$, and so it must have some other elements or else $L_{\omega_1^L}$ would admit a truth defintion ($\varphi$ is true in $L_{\omega_1^L}$ iff the unique element of $X$ contains $\varphi$).
And this is what I get from revision 3:
>! Let $X$ be the set of complete theories that satisfy "everything is countable" and have unboundedly many $\alpha<\omega_1^L$ with $L_\alpha$ realising them. The theory of $L_{\omega_1^L}$ is one such theory, and we will be done if we prove that there are some others. ...
I see, thanks! I'll be more careful to "de-format" copied text in the future.
I vaguely remember that spoilers had problems with all sorts of things.
But in this case, checking whether the problem could be multiline spoiler was the first things I tried.
I will freely admit that I do not use spoilers very often. There are certainly many users around here who have much more experience with them.
I wish I had some better advice - but this was basically all that I was able to do.
See you later! And have a nice day!

« first day (3429 days earlier)      last day (558 days later) »