to be continuous in a proof. Turns out, he assumed it somewhere in the fine print many pages before. Theorists can go to hell.
I spent 6 hours today trying to figure out how the author is getting a function

to be continuous in a proof. Turns out, he assumed it somewhere in the fine print many pages before. Theorists can go to hell.
Yes, that's how it is usually done.
What is funny is papers where people assume continuity for functions that can be proven to be discontinuous. Reviewers/editors never seem to catch that when the authors are HRM/VHRM.

to be continuous in a proof. Turns out, he assumed it somewhere in the fine print many pages before. Theorists can go to hell.
Yes, that's how it is usually done.
What is funny is papers where people assume continuity for functions that can be proven to be discontinuous. Reviewers/editors never seem to catch that when the authors are HRM/VHRM.
ie their results are false?
lmao. publish a correction and become HRM yourself then.

to be continuous in a proof. Turns out, he assumed it somewhere in the fine print many pages before. Theorists can go to hell.
Yes, that's how it is usually done.
What is funny is papers where people assume continuity for functions that can be proven to be discontinuous. Reviewers/editors never seem to catch that when the authors are HRM/VHRM.
ie their results are false?
lmao. publish a correction and become HRM yourself then.No one cares. The amount of erroneous theoretical work in the literature is immense, and pointing it out only builds enemies of powerful faculty.

ie their results are false?
lmao. publish a correction and become HRM yourself then.No one cares. The amount of erroneous theoretical work in the literature is immense, and pointing it out only builds enemies of powerful faculty.
wow economists are garbage
why dont you spam it on twitter anonymously

to be continuous in a proof. Turns out, he assumed it somewhere in the fine print many pages before. Theorists can go to hell.
Yes, that's how it is usually done.
What is funny is papers where people assume continuity for functions that can be proven to be discontinuous. Reviewers/editors never seem to catch that when the authors are HRM/VHRM.
ie their results are false?
lmao. publish a correction and become HRM yourself then.F7 is the hrm posting the discontinuous function to see if he gets caught