Timeline for What about the question "does Grothendieck have any pseudonymous paper"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2014 at 21:19 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | @quid: sorry, I had stupidly misread Andres's suggestion. I put a comment under Joël's question above. | |
| May 13, 2014 at 15:17 | comment | added | user9072 | @ToddTrimble what is "done"? I cannot find anything. | |
| May 12, 2014 at 22:16 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | @AndresCaicedo: done. | |
| May 12, 2014 at 19:43 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | @Todd, you may want to add a comment here (not under this answer, but rather under Joël's original post, for the sake of visibility) indicating that the question is now locked, and perhaps mentioning what led you to do this. | |
| May 9, 2014 at 18:32 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | Indeed, Andres. I pause to wonder whether it's just an elaborate joke. | |
| May 9, 2014 at 17:29 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | "What would the evidence be?" There is the biography by Scharlau, see here, based on extensive interviews. Anyway, the (finally closed) question is redundant, and asked in a very unprofessional manner. | |
| May 9, 2014 at 15:11 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | I tend to agree, and had considered writing something similar myself about the non-falsifiability. The only way I could see the OP being satisfied by a (presumably disappointing?) answer of 'no' would be from someone whose authority he trusts, and who would that be, and what would the evidence be besides "argument from authority"? | |
| May 9, 2014 at 14:57 | comment | added | jmc | @SamHopkins – Too bad the question is now [on hold], otherwise we could have retagged it with "Open problem"! | |
| May 9, 2014 at 14:26 | comment | added | S. Carnahan Mod | @SamHopkins Thanks for pointing out the famous mathematician pseudonym question. Is there any sense in which the existence of that question does not make the current question redundant? | |
| May 9, 2014 at 14:18 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | I don't understand the argument why because the answer is "it is unknown" that means the question is bad. Plenty of MO questions are of the form "is this estimate in number theory known" or similar, and often the response is "that is equivalent to an open question." On the other hand, if the questioner had asked whether Noga Alon has any pseudonymous papers, that has a straightforward answer, and so I guess would be a fine question except that there is already: mathoverflow.net/questions/45185/… | |
| May 9, 2014 at 14:07 | history | edited | Joël | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| May 9, 2014 at 13:49 | history | answered | Joël | CC BY-SA 3.0 |