0
$\begingroup$

My answer was deleted to this question: Minimax problem for optimization $\inf \sup \frac{x f(x)}{\int_0^1 f(t) dt}$

I see why it was deleted. It was because I could not form the question in the proper manner in enough time. Also it was because I did not say that I was coming from a physics standpoint. I probably should have done that.

My answer is correct however from a mathematical-physics standpoint.

Maybe I should just post a new question about it and show why it's true?

Thanks for the feedback!

$\endgroup$
5
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ A minor correction: your answer was not deleted - instead, it is greyed out for being heavily downvoted. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    May 2 '20 at 3:10
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ As KReiser pointed out, your answer has not been deleted. But, why would you not edit the existing answer? The edit will bump it to the frontpage, so voters can reconsider. $\endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    May 2 '20 at 6:41
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ (cont'd) Each and every time a post gets negative attention (in main) the go to - reaction should be to EDIT IT INTO SHAPE. Why so many think it might be prudent to delete it and try again is beyond me. May be they don't know that the bad effects of the deleted post won't go away by simply deleting the post (that may still be undeleted, possibly by somebody else)? $\endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    May 2 '20 at 6:44
  • $\begingroup$ I see where you are coming from @JyrkiLahtonen. That's a really good point. I will try my best to edit it into shape. $\endgroup$
    – geocalc33
    May 2 '20 at 13:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If someone asks a question about mathematics, then there is no such thing as "correct from a mathematical-physics standpoint". There might be considerations useful for doing physics, but those belong somewhere else, or with heavy disclaimers of which parts are actually precise mathematics. $\endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    May 2 '20 at 14:56
7
$\begingroup$

The Question to which you were replying does not refer to "physics" or invite an interpretation in terms of "an energy functional". Making this interpretation might be useful as content for Math.SE, but your presentation merely mentions such an interpretation and immediately transitions to "Putting it all together..."

If you have in mind some definite way to interpret the functional to be minimized as "energy", it might be a welcome supplement to the existing upvoted Accepted Answer to the Question. But the present wording does not really expose your thinking to Readers (such as myself) with a casual familiarity with mathematical physics, and minimum energy formulations in particular.

Note that you state your conclusion as finding a limit $r$ which is "not equal to $0$", and thus in apparent disagreement with the Accepted Answer. The Comments from that Answer's author on your post point to your having misunderstood what the Question asks for (an infimum), and you should make an effort to resolve the discrepancy before claiming (as above) "My answer is correct however from a mathematical-physics standpoint."

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Your answer was not deleted. It is faded because of the low net score. See also this post and its answer on meta: Answers which are "faded"?

One comment under your answer pointed out in detail the problem:

  • In the first sentence $f$ is a map on the reals.
  • In the next sentence it is a map on the plane (and I have no idea what 'under' means).
  • Then $h$ appears out of the blue. What does it mean to use the infsup???
  • Then there is a magical leap to mnimiser some unspecified energy functional under some unspecified parameterization.
  • Then a scalar equals a value in the plane.
  • And finally another magical leap with anew undefined symbol $\phi$.

The problem is not that just "not very readable", but that most of the steps in the answer have yet to make sense, no matter from what points of view.

My answer is correct however from a mathematical-physics standpoint.

With all due respect, claiming so does not suggest that your answer is correct. Those issues mentioned above need to be addressed if you indeed have a correct answer.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .