Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
1 to 22 of 22
I found the question as being a variation on "I'm stuck on a point on this paper; please read it for me and explain it to me." If the question had more relevent detail from the paper so that I did not have to read the paper to extract it, and it had the results of the questioners brainwork on it, e.g. "I tried this method but blah prevented me from using it; I thought about doing this but that is supposed to work only when conditions are satisfied that I know do not apply here", then I would look at it more closely, and attempt an answer or a redirect. As it is written, it is not clear (without referring to the link, which I have yet to do) how the symbols in the equations are related, or whether one can be used with the other. Since I do not know yet if the subject interests me, I am reluctant to spend more time on it.
Hopefully the people who voted to close would explain their rationale for closing. As MathOverflow questions go, I've seen better and more defensible ones than this closed, and I am not so sad to see this question get closed. This question, as is the case with many others, can be rewritten and improved to be more suitable for MathOverflow; when that happens, people can flag it for moderator attention or reopen it in other ways.
Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2011.05.23
To make things clear, my opinion is my own, and I do not claim to have a good read on the quality of a question as viewed by a specialist in the field. I am, however, the world's foremost authority on my own opinion; I believe I have accurately reported my reaction to the question, which may (or may not) be representative of the MathOverflow community.
Also, I do not know why the question was closed, but I do know that it is a question that could stand improvement. I had a suggestion for what would make it appeal more to me. Also, a really great question would be accessible to the expert and non-expert, and a good question would (in my opinion) go a little further to meet a general audience than this one has. If you use the meta.mathoverflow search tab, you can find some of the previous discussions about closed questions and why they were closed, as well as discussions on how to make a question better. You may learn more from doing that than from engaging me further in this discussion (although I don't mind the discussion).
I've reopened the question. I think if you're reading a paper (whether in algebraic geometry or numerical analysis), and one or two steps are unclear, it may be reasonable to ask MathOverflow, just in case someone with more expertise knows how it is done. Assuming the person asking has nontrivial background and has thought about the problem without resolution, this is perhaps an ideal MO use case. I suppose closure could have been prevented if the person asking had said more forcefully or explicitly that those particular steps were unclear in the paper.
(Nilima, you didn't mention Fedkiw's strength-related achievements, like bench pressing 250 kilos and squatting 350.)
Will, it seemed an appropriate double entendre. Also I showed the Robert Preston film to my son recently; we both have bits of it running through our heads. Also, I was not literate enough to make a more closely coupled reference. (And I really was expecting some of O'Rourke's animals to appear.)
Gerhard "Got Your Daily Pop-Culture Reference?" Paseman, 2011.05.24