« first day (2268 days earlier)      last day (2763 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

12:02 AM
@dsillman: You've transmogrified into a conic!
 
Lol yeah I found this picture and just decided to use it :)
 
Do we know exactly what's going on?
@dsillman: Did you settle the argument with 0celo? If I know $x>2$ and I say $x>1$, it's not incorrect. It's just not the strongest possible statement. These things happen.
 
Yeah I know we settled it. I was just upset because the bounds weren't perfect
 
It doesn't mean that $x$ is forced to be chosen in $(1,2]$.
We say an inequality (or bound) is sharp if it is best possible in the sense you're worrying about.
 
Yeah I should have mentioned that.
 
12:10 AM
It's like choosing the supremum (or least upper bound) instead of a random upper bound.
You'll get to that in Spivak :P
 
Spivak?
There's a billion Spivaks
At least 8
 
I recommended Spivak's Calculus ... Only 8 if you're counting the 5 volumes of diff geo separately.
 
I am
 
Then I get to 8, counting Calculus, Calculus on Manifolds, and his new Physics book.
 
Yep
 
12:12 AM
No one counts them as 5 separate books, but OK.
Now, you see, when you say a billion and you mean 8, that's an invalid inequality.
 
@TedShifrin b and 8 look similar.
 
Sure they do, cuz neither is an embedded submanifold.
 
what?
they don't have the same homotopy type
 
That, too.
 
@TedShifrin If a family of polynomials is uniformly bounded on a compact interval, can I also uniformly bound the derivatives?
Oh, and the degrees never exceed $k\in\Bbb N$
 
12:21 AM
Good thing you added that last condition.
Does a $C^0$ uniform bound imply a uniform bound on all the coefficients?
 
That's what it boils down to
 
Of course, this sort of thing is easy if you complexify and use Cauchy Integral Formula.
 
Oh?
 
Yup, there's an integral formula for the derivative.
 
I know
But why is that significant here?
 
12:23 AM
So it gives you uniform bounds on the derivative on compact subsets strictly contained inside your curve.
I dunno. I'm thinking about something else now.
 
morning
 
12:39 AM
G'night.
 
12:53 AM
I just walked next to UC admins for about 10 minutes. At one point one of them complained about the fact that people had told them "I'm being asked to teach sections with 50 people!" and laughed it off as "Yes, that's what budget cuts are, sweetie."
After that they talked about how they flew out to Sacramento to eat lunch with the CFO of best buy.
 
 
1 hour later…
user228700
2:01 AM
Hi everyone :-)
 
user228700
When given a single point on a line, how to find the equation of the line..? Is this possible?
 
@Kaumudi you know there are many different lines through a given point right? do you mean a line through the origin and another point?
 
user228700
@arctictern Yes, I do know that, so alright, there is no way :/
 
user228700
What I'm trying to do is find the parametric form of a tangent to a circle.
 
user228700
The equation of a circle in parametric form is given by $x=acos\theta$ and $y=asin\thete$ where $a$ is the radius of the circle.
 
user228700
2:07 AM
And I've to find the general equation of a tangent to this circle.
 
user228700
I know that the tangent will intersect the circle at some point $(acos\alpha, asin\alpha)$...but I dunno anything else about the tangent :/
 
user228700
Oh hang on, I know that the slope of this tangent would be $(-1/m)$ where $m$ is the slope of the radius connecting the point of intersection and the center...
 
yup, with the intersection and the slope of the radius, you have the slope of the tangent, hence you have its point slope form and thus can convert it into parametric form
 
user228700
Yes, but I'm not arriving at the correct expression :/ I keep getting $xsin\alpha+ycos\alpha=a$ The $cos\alpha$ and $sin\alpha$ should be swapped :/
 
user228700
My brain is effed up in the morning time. I got it. Thanks :-)
 
2:26 AM
the line tangent to the circle of radius r at (a,b) will be ax+by=r^2
if you're familiar with vectors there's a good argument
 
[Division by zero] I have been summarising my findings on that based on an algebraic structure I have been working on in the last 4 days. It is now summarised in a blog article of mine
Arctic, if you don't mind, could you have a look at it and see if it makes sense to you?
Abstract: (The process of building) division by zero algebra seems to provide useful tools in studying generalised RPS magmas
 
The Arctic (/ˈɑːrktɪk/ or /ˈɑːrtɪk/) is a polar region located at the northernmost part of Earth. The Arctic consists of the Arctic Ocean, adjacent seas, and parts of Alaska (United States), Canada, Finland, Greenland (Denmark), Iceland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. Land within the Arctic region has seasonally varying snow and ice cover, with predominantly treeless permafrost-containing tundra. Arctic seas contain seasonal sea ice in many places. The Arctic region is a unique area among Earth's ecosystems. For example, the cultures in the region and the Arctic indigenous peoples have adapted to...
themoreyouknow
maybe I'll look at it sometime. division by zero doesn't interest me much tbh.
 
ok
 
 
2 hours later…
4:20 AM
@MikeMiller That's pretty sad tbh
 
 
1 hour later…
5:44 AM
Question: In the proof found here proofwiki.org/wiki/…
When they instantiate the existence of x in the preimage... how do they know such an x exists
 
@PrinceM the whole point is to conclude the preimage of an open set is open. case 1: the preimage is empty, so it's open. case 2: the preimage is not empty, so we can let x be in the preimage [etc]
 
6:04 AM
yeah, thats what I wrote when I proved it.
My question wasn't exactly what happens if U is empty, it was 'is there a reason why we can assume its not?'
 
because if it's already empty the preimage is already open
 
So then their proof should say 'let U be a nonempty open set in M2'
 
 
2 hours later…
7:59 AM
 
 
2 hours later…
10:13 AM
@BalarkaSen I ... uh ... no, I guess.
also, wow, how are there all these new posts on neverendingbooks
which one do you mean
 
@SohamChowdhury let me look
 
@iwriteonbananas It seems like he's asking why should we define the cup product like that. That's perfectly fine?
 
user116211
If suprema and infima exist, aren't they unique?
 
user116211
I was reading Kelley, where he writes:
 
user116211
10:27 AM
> Clearly suprema and infima are unique in chains.
 
user116211
Isn't it a trivial fact to mention?
 
user116211
hmm.
 
@BalarkaSen oh, this is really interesting
I suppose $\mathrm{Gal}(\Bbb Q^{\mathrm{cyc}}/\Bbb Q)$ is described by CFT?
 
Yea
 
this is so cool though
thanks
 
10:31 AM
I thought it was cool too.
I don't know anything about it though
 
i just read the punchline
whoa
"Mesdemoiselles Adele et Idele"
 
heh
 
user116211
Original Bourbaki?
 
@BalarkaSen But like...the answer is just contravariance
diagonal induces a map on cohomology that goes the other way
so we get a product
 
@iwriteonbananas Sure; but why does this product geometrically mean what it should?
 
user116211
10:37 AM
It's the French Edition.
 
I think that's what he's asking.
The algebra is clear, but not the motivation.
 
I dunno, I still find the question off-putting
We get a graded algebra structure on cohomology of spaces
Like....what type of answer is he expecting?
 
The corresponding stupid map for homology also gives $H_*$ a graded algebra structure.
But that ain't interesting
 
Stupid map = induced by projection?
 
yeah
 
10:43 AM
Well because we discard whatever is happening on the other factor
The diagonal doesn't discard anything
 
How can you see that $$p.v. \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{cos x}{x+i} dx \neq Re \: p.v. \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{e^{ix}}{x+i} dx $$
 
I don't know why I'm getting so worked up over this
 
sure, I'm just saying "we get a graded algebra structure on cohomology" is not sufficient reason to be interesting.
@iwriteonbananas if that question puts you off, fuhget about it.
I don't care enough to post an answer there, for example
 
Is it because of the stupid $i$ in the denominator?
 
It's more of a meta question.
 
10:46 AM
@BalarkaSen That's true I suppose
 
so, what're you upto?
 
Studying linear algebra
you?
 
nothing as of now; but studying vector bundles and diffgeo in general
 
That's good stuff
Too bad I forgot it all
You can re-teach me
 
I'm learning differential geometry of surfaces, though, not the abstract stuff.
But I can teach you whatever I have learnt of vector bundles, sure.
 
10:55 AM
Sweet
 
11:10 AM
"For God is the Alexandrov compactification of the universe"
-Groth. IV. 22
 
what if the universe already was compact? does god have nothing to do with it anymore?
 
That's what atheists claim, probably. But in truth, it's only locally compact ;)
 
user227867
12:03 PM
Are there any good sources for transcendental methods in algebraic geometry other than Griffiths and Harris's Principles of Algebraic Geometry? It seems that book is full of errors, according to reviews I read. Thanks.
 
What does "transcendental methods" mean?
 
user227867
Using the methods of complex analysis and differential geometry, not just algebraic methods like schemes, which is done in Hartshore. Refers to algebraic geometry done over the complex numbers, of course.
 
user227867
I know about the recent book by Donu Arapura, Algebraic Geometry Over the Complex Numbers, which seems to be a good option too.
 
For curves I have heard praises of Forster. But I don't know any other book on complex geometry. Ask Ted.
 
user227867
I just bought a copy of Forster's Lectures on Riemann Surfaces. Thanks.
 
user227867
12:06 PM
Together with it, I got a copy of Gunning and Rossi's Analytic Functions of Several Complex Variables.
 
user227867
I am also considering getting Huybrecht's Complex Geometry, but it has more than 15 unproved theorems in the book, which is a minus point. However, he does prove the Kodaira vanishing and embedding theorems in full.
 
I have heard of Demailly's book.
 
user227867
Yes, but it is not yet published, only available as a free PDF on his website
 
ah, k
 
user227867
I also know about Well's Differential Analysis on COmplex Manifolds and Morrow and Kodaira's Complex Manifolds.
 
user227867
12:09 PM
Hard to make a choice for me because I have idiosyncratic requirements for books
 
12:55 PM
@DHMO
 
@Ramanujan
 
Typing question
Area of triangle = 1/2
From were do we get $c_3$ ? As 1 1 1 ?
 
@Ramanujan $c_3$??
 
Yes
 
sorry, no idea
 
1:00 PM
OMG!!!
 
you could always expand it to verify it
 
Are we just adding zero matrix? uploading my work
 
@Ramanujan no, matrix determinants don't work like that
 
OK another question to clear
Iam not getting any way to go beyond this step
 
use the formula?
 
1:07 PM
 
@Ramanujan try to expand 2)
 
I didn't get what you mean?
 
expand the second option
 
Iam not interested to solve this questions by verification method , I want to solve given condition to get any one of these options .
Which I tried but stuck at that step
 
@Ramanujan too bad then
 
1:13 PM
Why?
Isn't there any way to get that??!?!?!??
 
I advise you to expand from the options, lol
 
Ah,didnot expected from mathematician like you😔 you discouraged me,😥
 
@Ramanujan mathematics is discouraging
 
You as a mathematician is discouraging me (never ever mathematics) , I will try that on my own
 
@Ramanujan yep, I am discouraging
 
1:18 PM
@DHMO you might need some sleep(if not so)
 
@Ramanujan make it one fraction
@Ramanujan why i told you to expand from the options is that there is no "standard" form. your answer is correct on its own
 
Mean?
 
to make it as an MC (multiple-choice question) is a kind of conformity
to expand from the options is just another kind of conformity
@Ramanujan fraction addition
 
I will be keeping it in my mind
 
of course real world mathematics does not need you to conform into one of the forms
so you don't need to expand from the "options"
because there is no such thing as "option" in real world mathematics
 
1:21 PM
Fraction addition?what step you want me to do as? You are right (there is no option in math)
 
user116211
@Ramanujan $$\begin{bmatrix}x_1 & y_1 &1\\ x_2-x_1 & y_2-y_1 & 0\\ x_3-x_1 & y_3 -y_1 & 0\end{bmatrix}$$
 
user116211
Now, find $\rm det$ along $\rm c_3\,.$
 
$\displaystyle = \frac12 \left[ \frac{(a-c)ac}{abc} + \frac{(c-b)cb}{abc} + \frac{(b-a)ba}{abc} \right]$
 
@MAFIA36790 do you mean this ^?
 
1:33 PM
@Ramanujan did you read my message?
 
Can't understand😑 @DHMO
 
@Ramanujan do you know how to add two fractions?
 
Yes
 
three fractions?
 
Lol to read that “do you know how to add two fractions?”
 
1:36 PM
@Ramanujan then just add the 3 fractions tgt
 
Yes I can
Do you mean 1/a + 1/b + 1/c ?
 
no
@Ramanujan here
34 mins ago, by Ramanujan
user image
 
@DHMO lol again stucked
 
@Ramanujan wrong in the second line
 
What?
 
1:44 PM
@Ramanujan wrong in the second line
 
Ergh what's wrong there?
Sorry, I got it,big mistake from me
Regretting
Will be solving agoin
@DHMO now what?
 
@Ramanujan expand
 
@DHMO now?????????
 
2:00 PM
@Ramanujan can u show the steps above?
 
$a^2(c-b)$ is wrong
@Ramanujan
 
From which step?😥
 
from the step containing $a^2(c-b)$
oh, never mind
$b^2(a-b)$ is wrong
from the step containing $b^2(a-b)$
 
OK , so I should take it $b^2(a-c)$
I will come in next five - 10 minutes after solving whole(I think SE is keep distracting me) iam usually better
 
2:21 PM
 
@Ramanujan group the remaining four terms into two groups
$b^2a-b^2c+c^2b-c^2a$
wait
Make it $b^2a-c^2a+c^2b-b^2c$
then group the first two and the last two
brb
 
@DHMO can't see any further,trying to stand on your shoulders for next steps
@DHMO are you there?
@DHMO are you there??
 
2:47 PM
In geometry, a group of isometries of hyperbolic space is called geometrically finite if it has a well-behaved fundamental domain. A hyperbolic manifold is called geometrically finite if it can be described in terms of geometrically finite groups. == Geometrically finite polyhedra == A convex polyhedron C in hyperbolic space is called geometrically finite if its closure C in the conformal compactification of hyperbolic space has the following property: For each point x in C, there is a neighborhood U such that all faces of C meeting U also pass through x (Ratcliffe 1994, 12.4). For example, every...
Please describe exactly what is "well behaved"
 
I would assume this is in the article...?
 
@DHMO U there?
 
3:04 PM
@Ramanujan start from here lol
$a^2(c-b)+b^2a-b^2c+c^2b-c^2a = a^2(c-b)+b^2a-c^2a+c^2b-b^2c = a^2(c-b)+(b^2-c^2)a+cb(c-b)$
here
 
3:16 PM
@DHMO did you got that right?
 
@Ramanujan maybe
 
Ah,i also need to go through another topics
 
3:26 PM
Hello
Does any one here specialize in Graph Theory
I would like to know about inequlity in graph theory that says the minimum degree of subgraph is greater than the ratio of the subgraph (assuming that a graph has at least one edge)
I want to know how to prove it?
 
@Secret Not sure about the point of asking a question that's answered in the article you linked...
 
Ok
give me a second
 
I think I have a singularity in my tooth
 
They don't really say what is meant by "well -behaved for a fundamental domain, they only give an example of polyhedra in hyperbolic space
 
@Secret Please read carefully.
 
3:40 PM
> A discrete group G of isometries of hyperbolic space is called geometrically finite if it has a fundamental domain C that is convex, geometrically finite, and exact
> A convex polyhedron C in hyperbolic space is called geometrically finite if its closure C in the conformal compactification of hyperbolic space has the following property:
For each point x in C, there is a neighborhood U such that all faces of C meeting U also pass through x
> A hyperbolic manifold is called geometrically finite if it has a finite number of components, each of which is the quotient of hyperbolic space by a geometrically finite discrete group of isometries
Unless the convex polyhedron case somehow is referring to the fundemental domain...?
all other examples keep referencing back to the term "geoemtrically finite"
 
Fundmental domain of a discrete group of isometries of the hyperbolic space is always ever a polyhedron.
 
ok, didn't knew that...
I thought it might be something more fancy or abstract
 
4:13 PM
Hello @AndrewThompson
Are you familiar with harmonic functions?
 
@Evinda I know the definition.
 
That is my question:
 
Sometimes it is hard not to cry when correcting homework
 
Let $u(x,y)$ be a harmonic function in $\mathbb{R}^2$. I want to compute $u(0,0)$ given that $u|_{x^2+y^2=1}=\sin{\phi}+1$, where $x= \cos{\phi}, y=\sin{\phi}, \phi \in [0,2 \pi)$.

From a known theorem we have that the only solution of our problem is the following:

$ u(x,y)=\frac{1-(x^2+y^2)}{2 \pi} \int_{x^2+y^2=1} \frac{(\xi_2+1)}{|x-\xi|^2} dS =\frac{1-(x^2+y^2)}{2 \pi} \int_{x^2+y^2=1} \frac{(\xi_2+1)}{(x- \xi_1)^2+ (y-\xi_2)^2} dS $

Is it right so far? If so, can we compute the integral?
 
Sorry, no idea.
 
4:24 PM
A ok
Hey @TedShifrin
Do you make have an idea?
That is the theorem that I mean:
$(\star) \Delta u=0 \text{ in } B_R(0), u|_{\partial{B_R(0)}}=\phi $

($ B_R(0)$ is a sphere with radius $R$)


Theorem: Let $ \phi \in C^0(\partial{B_R}(0))$ , then the function $ u(x)=\frac{R^2-|x|^2}{w_n R} \int_{\partial{B_R}} \frac{\phi(\xi)}{|x-\xi|^n} dS $ is the only (classical) solution of $(\star)$.

($ w_n $ is the area of the unit ball in $ \mathbb{R}^n $)
 
Well, you've written $x = \cos \phi$, $y = \sin \phi$. Then $x^2 + y^2 = 1$, right?
 
Yes @AndrewThompson
 
Then your integral is zero, no?
You write $$\frac{1 - (x^2 + y^2)}{2\pi}$$ before the integral. That's 0.
 
Yes? I have also thought of this, but I thought that we could not use the x and y at this point because we integrate over $x^2+y^2=1$. So we integrate over the whole space, right?
 
I'm assuming you mean to say that you integrate over $x^2 + y^2 = 1$, hence the polar coordinates at that point. If that's the case I still have no idea. If it is as you've written, i.e. x = cos theta and y = sin theta, then it is 0.
 
4:28 PM
@AndrewThompson So have I applied the theorem correctly?Or have I done something wrong at this part: $\int_{\partial{B_R}} \frac{\phi(\xi)}{|x-\xi|^n} dS $ ?
 
Hello
Can you give me an advice how to find the solutions of x?
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E2*2%5E(x%2B1)%2B2%5E(%7Cx-3%7C%2B2)%3Dx%5E2*2%5E(%7Cx-3%7C%2B4)%2B2%5E(x-1)
This works:
https://goo.gl/F0yL0R
 
4:44 PM
@Apeiron Hi... are you greek?
 
4:56 PM
How is the difficulty of an introductory course in probability theory compared to say a basic course in complex analysis or vector calc?
 
5:16 PM
is it just me or do most gravatars suggest an anti-clockwise spiral?
 
Mine's clockwise.
 
my mind sees it as anti-clockwise^
 
meh
 
the parts pointing in a clockwise direction
make it look like they are trailing behind
$==== \qquad <--$
$\qquad || \quad <--$
 
5:47 PM
Hey guys you have time to help me a bit out in linear algebra?
 
Just state your question instead of asking if you can ask!
 
Well this is the question i have . I dont really fully understand the answer and need to see how to do thus
I mean i do not grasp what i have to show
 
You have to describe those 3 rings as simply as possible, showing that they are isomorphic to well known rings as it's done in the answer is probably the easiest approach
 
6:04 PM
@Alessandro I mean i just do not fully understand how i mean how would i do this for the first example a)
 
Do you agree that your groups are $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ for $n=2,3,4$ and that they are cyclic so their automorphisms are decided by the image of a generator?
 
hmm i think that's precisely what i do not understand .. I mean I only understand what a ring / group is... and the different types of morphism...
 
ok, so you don't know what a cyclic group is?
 
nope ... I had only a brief introduction to groups rings and morphisms ... and this is part of my linear algebra course
 
hm, ok, you should notice that in any of your $3$ groups all of the elements of the group can be obtained by "adding" $f$ to itself repeatedly (where "adding" refers to the group operation described by your table)
 
6:14 PM
hey guys, need some help with understanding matrices, i have this matrix.. $\begin{pmatrix} 6 & -3 \\ -4 & 2 \end{pmatrix}$, I know its determinent is $0$ but i dont understand how the plane is mapped onto the line $2x+3y=0$
 
In the $4$th, for example, $f=f$, $g=f+f$, $h=g+f=f+f+f$ and $e=h+f=f+f+f+f$
Suppose now that you have an automorphism $\phi$, if you know $\phi (f)$ can you determine what's, say, $\phi (g)$ using the fact I stated above and the fact that $\phi$ is an automorphism?
 
@SylentNyte solve for A and B in the equation A(6x-3y)+B(-4x+2)=0
 
@arctictern thanks, I played around a little and figured it out for myself a little while ago, but thank you either way :)
 
6:45 PM
using matrices, if I want to rotate(R) and then enlarge(E), is it RE or ER? and why?
 
When you apply a matrix A to a vector x, it's Ax right?
So then if AB denotes matrix multiplication, applying AB to x yields ABx, or in other words A(Bx). That means applying B to x first (giving Bx) and then applying A (that is, applying A to Bx giving A(Bx)).
 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (2268 days earlier)      last day (2763 days later) »