3
$\begingroup$

I feel that the boundaries are unclear in terms of how to approach discussing open conjecture. In most cases such discussions rapidly spiral out of control and into an argument, which defeats the purpose of the website. What aspects of open problems are or are not allowed to be questioned and discussed?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This seems related (to an extent): meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/4125/… (But I would not say this is a duplicate of that question.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Mar 3 '14 at 19:32
  • $\begingroup$ I have read that but what I am referring to are smaller ideas and not entire papers $\endgroup$ – user129967 Mar 3 '14 at 19:33
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Posting a paper with an invitation to read it does not constitute a question. $\endgroup$ – user127096 Mar 3 '14 at 19:34
  • $\begingroup$ I do not mean entire papers, what I mean are smaller ideas and at most a brief outline of a solution. $\endgroup$ – user129967 Mar 3 '14 at 19:35
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @user129967 Checking whether a brief outline of a solution could work involves turning the outline into an actual proof. So the burden would be even larger. $\endgroup$ – Michael Greinecker Mar 3 '14 at 19:36
  • $\begingroup$ Apparently about math.stackexchange.com/questions/698138/… $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Mar 4 '14 at 7:19
  • $\begingroup$ Yes it is, but do you think it is inappropriate $\endgroup$ – user129967 Mar 4 '14 at 7:21
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Suggesting elementary approaches to notorious unsolved problems is pretty much guaranteed to be a bad idea, on m.se or anywhere else. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Mar 4 '14 at 10:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .