Timeline for answer to The most outrageous (or ridiculous) conjectures in mathematics by Jan-Christoph Schlage-Puchta
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 22, 2017 at 22:37 | comment | added | HJRW | I guess the counterpoint between Burnside's problem and Tarski monsters is in the spirit of the question (though I read the question as asking about problems that are still open). It would be nice to know what Tarski thought. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 12:43 | comment | added | Jan-Christoph Schlage-Puchta | I do not have a reference which settles what Tarski believed, but the general context would be the existence of finitely generated infinite torsion groups. I guess that around 1910 it was generally believed that such groups do not exist, so the existence of monsters was outrageous. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 9:01 | comment | added | HJRW | So did Tarski, or anyone else, ever conjecture that his monsters existed? At the moment this seems to be an outrageous theorem. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 3:42 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | @HJRW I've also had trouble keeping track for some of the answers, whether they satisfy the conditions of the OP. I'm not sure the OP is absolutely crystal clear here. But he does write, "Very important examples where the conjecture was believed as false when it was made but this is no longer the consensus may also qualify!" So this answer may be kosher according to that. | |
| Jan 21, 2017 at 23:06 | comment | added | HJRW | What's the outrageous conjecture here? If it's the existence of Tarski monsters, this is now known to be true, and therefore doesn't satisfy item 1. | |
| Jan 20, 2017 at 22:16 | history | edited | Charles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
link, clean up commas
|
| S Jan 19, 2017 at 18:37 | history | answered | Jan-Christoph Schlage-Puchta | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Jan 19, 2017 at 18:37 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Jan-Christoph Schlage-Puchta |