New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different • Hacker News Board

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#21

Post by ComodoHacker » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:42 PM UTC

luxuryballs wrote: post #9

can I get an ELI5?

I guess that's already it. :)

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#22

Post by jeffrallen » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:44 PM UTC

A world without the Pentagon would be fundamentally different too. More peaceful...

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#23

Post by visarga » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:50 PM UTC

luxuryballs wrote: post #9

can I get an ELI5?

and an application ... what can I use it for?

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#24

Post by mFixman » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:50 PM UTC

I'm impressed by how clear the article is for a layman. I only know the very basics of graph theory and Ramsay theory and I understood the topic perfectly. This is in comparison to the paper [1] which at a glance seems terse and difficult to understand.

If anyone likes Ramsay theory and these kind of articles, I recommend Erdős' biography "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers".

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.04994

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#25

Post by mFixman » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #17

It would help if the article included at least one real world application in layman's terms.

Because you are finding the secrets of the Universe? Because math is fun?

Not all work has to have a real world application ($$$). It would help if the you included at least one real world application of writing your comment.

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#26

Post by 101008 » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #23

luxuryballs wrote: post #9

can I get an ELI5?

and an application ... what can I use it for?

First paragraph of the article says something interesting that can be useful at parties :)

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#27

Post by system2 » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

ComodoHacker wrote: post #21

luxuryballs wrote: post #9

can I get an ELI5?

I guess that's already it. :)

Today's 5 year olds are all mathematicians anyway.

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#28

Post by strmpnk » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

mFixman wrote: post #24

I'm impressed by how clear the article is for a layman. I only know the very basics of graph theory and Ramsay theory and I understood the topic perfectly. This is in comparison to the paper [1] which at a glance seems terse and difficult to understand. If anyone likes Ramsay theory and these kind of articles, I recommend Erdős' biography "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers". [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.04994

Quanta Magazine does an excellent job with balancing accessible writing and advanced topics. It's just enough to get someone interested in the problem and the basic ideas to start thinking about it.

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#29

Post by dpatterbee » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 5:02 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #23

luxuryballs wrote: post #9

can I get an ELI5?

and an application ... what can I use it for?

I can't possibly imagine why you would want an application for recently developed mathematics. I would have thought that by now mathematics would have proven its worth enough to not have to justify itself.

Re: New proof reveals that graphs with no pentagons are fundamentally different

#30

Post by voldacar » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 5:03 PM UTC

Question for people knowledgable about Ramsey theory - with current computing tech, will we ever be able to find the exact value of R(5,5) within our lifetimes?

I've read the famous Erdos quote about R(5,5) vs R(6,6) and he seemed to think that it was at least theoretically possible if the whole human race had to find it quickly or face destruction.