About a year ago I asked on MO when a Newton basin fractal is continuously determined by the roots of its polynomial. I mentioned in that question that I had convinced myself that the roots of the polynomial must all be simple, and nobody in the answers or comments called that out as wrong or as obvious.

I'd like to nail down whether this result is correct, already known, interesting etc. Is it appropriate for me to post a question (suitably elaborated) like:

Is this "fact" I mentioned in my other question already known? Is it even correct?

It's basically a reference request, but it's also pretty close to a "here's my work, please give me feedback" kind of question, which makes me hesitant to post it on MO without checking meta first.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It seems like a reasonable question to me. If you state it as a reference request along the lines of "I've convinced myself that this is true, but suspect that it should have already appeared in the literature" etc etc, then I would have thought it would be received positively... You could also flag up if you have any lingering doubts. $\endgroup$
    – Nick Gill
    Nov 12, 2015 at 15:05
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Asking if it is in the literature (after you have done some looking) is definitely on-topic for MathOverflow; asking for feedback of your proof not so much. If you have an idea of how a simple proof might go, or want to verify a step in your proof, and are willing to accept a different proof, you can ask about the step or for a different proof. You can then point to your work for comparison, and maybe someone will have something to say about that. But don't ask them to read your stuff to answer your question. Gerhard "Nobody Likes To Read Anyway" Paseman, 2015.11.12 $\endgroup$ Nov 12, 2015 at 17:58
  • $\begingroup$ OK, I've gone ahead and asked on MO, keeping in mind @GerhardPaseman's advice to not ask anyone to read my work. Thanks! $\endgroup$ Nov 13, 2015 at 22:19


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .