Timeline for How to substantiate the claim that something is not known?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2015 at 11:59 | answer | added | ojo | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 22, 2015 at 22:36 | comment | added | emory | I think you are overthinking this. You are the expert. "No other necessary or sufficient conditions are known." is sufficient. If you prefer: "We do not know of any other necessary or sufficient conditions." | |
| May 22, 2015 at 22:05 | comment | added | A.P. | @emory Yes, my master's thesis is supposed to be original research, but I don't understand your point. In the case of the example statement, my result has some nice consequences for numbers with some property P, and Schmidt proved that P holds for a certain class of numbers. Some sufficient conditions for P, say, could have allowed me to generalise those consequences, but alas... | |
| May 22, 2015 at 21:25 | comment | added | emory | Is your master's thesis supposed to be original research? If so, then are you not asserting that the thesis itself is (believed to be be) unknown but knowable. | |
| May 22, 2015 at 13:27 | answer | added | Scott Seidman | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 21, 2015 at 16:55 | comment | added | jub0bs | Negative proofs are hard... | |
| May 21, 2015 at 16:10 | answer | added | Count Iblis | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 21, 2015 at 14:50 | answer | added | rumtscho | timeline score: 28 | |
| May 21, 2015 at 13:49 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/601384390879485952 | ||
| May 21, 2015 at 10:13 | vote | accept | A.P. | ||
| May 21, 2015 at 9:59 | history | edited | Stephan Kolassa |
edited tags
|
|
| May 21, 2015 at 9:55 | answer | added | Steve Heim | timeline score: 100 | |
| May 21, 2015 at 9:34 | review | First posts | |||
| May 21, 2015 at 9:34 | |||||
| May 21, 2015 at 9:30 | history | asked | A.P. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |