Timeline for Asking exactly what you need
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Sep 15, 2013 at 17:52 | comment | added | Charles Staats | Part of what is going on is probably that the "How to Ask" page specifically recommends generalization as a way to make your question more interesting. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 20:43 | comment | added | fedja | something more general (and more illuminating) could be said Yep. I'll sort of buy that though if you want A, cannot do it yourself, and post a generalization B, you forfeit the possibility that people may know other "general and illuminating" approaches C,D,E, all of which imply A, but not B. @Yemon Choi The phrase "like in my classes" may reveal more about the state of affairs than you intended to say. I should remember it when running my graduate course. :-) | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 20:17 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @fedja the attitude/action you mention in your most recent comment may also stem from an alarming attitude to maths that I see occasionally (or when I referee, frequently): "I want to prove X, there must be some Big Theorem that implies X, just like in my classes". So for such people, solving the question becomes a matter of being told which large book of recipes to look in. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 17:28 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | @fedja: Provided that people know exactly what they need for some research purpose, I'd suppose in many cases that the urge not to hone it down to the exact specification comes from a hunch that something more general (and more illuminating) could be said. It could of course also be paranoia, either in the sense you mentioned (concerns about stealing or being scooped), or alternatively in the sense that by exposing one's true thoughts, one might look stupid. I'm not sure which (of any) of these possibilities would apply to your test cases. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 16:15 | comment | added | fedja | "one doesn't always know exactly what one wants to ask." True in general, but in both examples I gave it clearly wasn't the case. I mean, the situation is often like I need $a+b<a^2+b^2$ under the condition $ab^2=1000$ and ask "What is known about quadratic inequalities under cubic constraints?". I doubt Halmos would recommend such approach :). 2) Of course, you cannot tell what the reason was in each case, but can you just imagine any reason that would make you behave like this? @Todd Trimble | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 15:35 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | @ToddTrimble Yes, ok, that's true. So rather than "ask exactly what you need", perhaps words to the effect that the question should be as precise as possible. If the point of the question is an attempt to clarify what the right question ought to be in a specific setting, this should be made explicit. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 14:53 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | Re 2): impossible to answer. Rhetorical question? Re 1): sometimes, I guess. But I rather suppose that (and this can happen to anyone in the course of doing research) one doesn't always know exactly what one wants to ask. I think Halmos remarks on this in his automathography: often people seeking help are really looking for help finding the right questions rather than black and white answers. (For another data point, I had to guess what the OP really wanted here: mathoverflow.net/questions/141363/reference-for-stasheff-operad/…). I think you're doing well here, @fedja. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 14:15 | comment | added | Andrés E. Caicedo | Re 3): Yes. Also: Vote to close as "unclear"; the vote can be reverted once/if the issues are clarified. | |
| Sep 6, 2013 at 14:03 | history | asked | fedja | CC BY-SA 3.0 |