It's less than a full page in the original journal.
While we're on the subject of brevity, page 23 has the shortest recommendation letter I've ever seen.
Be sure to check this video, as it is very good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3dkRsTqdDA&index=38&list=FL...
It's the first link under "archive" on https://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/archive.html
Here's an IPFS link: https://www.eternum.io/ipfs/QmaCQy4GdRTh6jHf2eDJVoWzgHzTbwVj...
"It has not escaped our notice that the specific pairing we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material."
(Your link appears broken, btw)
"A year later, when I began to worry about a thesis topic, Neyman just shrugged and told me to wrap the two problems in a binder and he would accept them as my thesis."
Each paper was seven pages, which would make a fourteen page thesis.
This makes it the most expensive piece of literature (cost per word) that I know of.
Given its, uh, content, this particular paper can really be classified as anything.
i.e. I wasn't talking about this specific paper, but most of all the other papers.
"Cole’s lecture was different. He did not speak a single word. He simply went to the board, and began to calculate. On one side of the board, he calculated 267 – 1 = 147,573,952,589,676,412,927 by hand. Then he went to the other side of the board and worked out the product of 193,707,721 and 761,838,257,287, the factors of 147,573,952,589,676,412,927. After spending the silent hour working out the calculations, Cole simply turned around and went back to his seat, completely silent! The audience erupted into a standing ovation."
I think I spotted an error there.
This is another error (though this one is actually in the article). The factors are 23 and 89.
Papers motivating problems are, frankly, quite important and should be done more often.
Acknowledgments: This study was supported by NSF DEB77-04889,
and grew out of discussion with the Society for Historical Orations on Theory.
Daniel H. Janzen
Department of Biology,
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA
I just had to look this one up though, so for posterity: https://doi.org/10.2307/2387687.
This blog post was published Jun 17, 2016.
The Numberphile video was published Dec 7, 2016.
1. A one-sentence proof published in American Mathematical Monthly that costs $19 to download on JSTOR,
2. The 8-page paper that introduced ζ (zeta) notation, two proofs of the ζ(s) L-function, several new methods in analytic and number theory, and (most famously) the Riemann Hypothesis,
3. Lebesque's paper introducing modern measure theory,
4. Elkies' paper proving the (titular) existence of infinitely many supersingular primes for every elliptic curve defined on the rationals.
It seems it was a bit easier to publish short, dense material in the 20th century :)
"Cuando despertó, el dinosaurio todavía estaba allí."
"When he woke up, the dinosaur was still there."
I'd love to find an example of a media outlet that does such a thing, albeit with mid/high-brow content.
'For sale: baby shoes, never worn.'
Also interesting, it seems to have been basically the only thing he published, and he published it mainly because he had to publish something.
(lrf v'z wbxvat)
E. W. Dijkstra, “Solution of a problem in concurrent programming control,” Commun. ACM, vol. 8, no. 9, p. 569, Sep. 1965.
Just one page, no references (understandable, since it is one of the very first papers on concurrent algorithms), proposes a mechanism for mutual exclusion between N processes.
Or it's something completely different?
Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
He or she didn't. He or she was quite direct. See https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/insinuate.
If anything, it is you who are insinuating that the commenter did not read the HN guidelines. The guidelines misuse the word 'insinuate' to mean 'say or insinuate' or possibly 'accuse'.