Tim, if it simplifies life any, I would be willing to host one of the threads (presumably the lower/upper bounds thread) on my own blog. Yes, some kind of beefed up Wiki, see the discussion at Nathaniel Thurston’s blog If this idea is interesting, I’d be happy to help set up something like this or volunteer my math site as a host wiki. You can also still use inline latex notation, and user signatures with each section to maintain attribution for each comment (which would also be recorded in the page’s history anyway). This has several advantages – contributors can preview and edit their own comments in case of typo’s and updates, anyone can start a new thread on a page of its own, embedded links to other comments are do-able, as well as adding a reference section. Modifying Sperner (producing a new proof and/or modifying to help with k>2)įor future discussions of this type, it might be useful to use a wiki platform, similar to wikipedia. Quasirandomness (or however you want to describe the approach to the primary problem) If we want to go multi-thread, we can probably stick with just three, since we’re tackling what seems like three problems now: may offer a powerful enough solution to have a deeply nested and in depth discussion. The commenting really needs to support threading, otherwise following the discussions is going to get very hard, very quickly. What you would really need is something which will look like this TiddlyDesktop with some extra functionalities about multiple threading of ideas, concurrent updates and distributed repositories. – splitting the thread in multiple topics will damage the continuity.

– continuing the same post will ultimately break some browsers limits. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. This entry was posted on Februat 1:07 pm and is filed under polymath1.

Tiddlydesktop bug