« first day (2021 days earlier)      last day (3015 days later) » 

11:00 PM
Sorry, my first statement is true only if $M$ is not $S^1 \times S^2$.
 
Agh, I don't like reading contorted proofs.
 
@TedShifrin What's the proof you're reading?
 
I'm done now. I had assigned my two students the generalized tube lemma.
 
Ah, OK.
 
@BalarkaSen what is the different between simplicial complex and delta complex ?
 
11:02 PM
@L33ter Simplices are determined uniquely by the faces in one, but not in the other.
 
@L33ter Delta complexes can have faces of the same simplex identifield.
 
E.g., $S^2$ obtained by gluing two triangles by the boundary.
 
oh I see
 
This is delta but not simplicial as two simplices have the same boundary.
 
so that is what they mean by unique
 
11:04 PM
@Balarka: Your second point is good. Think about what happens with my question when you replace "Prime" with irreducible, and remember the sphere theorem. You may as well assume everything is orientable.
 
thanks pval and balarka
 
Are Δ-complexes called that literally just 'cause Δ looks like a triangle?
 
probably
 
I hope I never hear about delta complezes again.
 
@Akiva I think so! $\Delta^n$ is standard notation for $n$-simplex.
 
11:05 PM
Not likely, @MikeM.
 
Delta complezes are not a thing, so you'll not hear about them much.
 
Imagine a world in which Greek didn't have a triangle-letter… *shudders*
What would we do without it?
 
what is delta complezes ?
oh that is when mike was drunk or something like that
 
A script d in Cyrillic looks like an English script g.
 
Oh my f---
 
11:06 PM
I probably knew that at some point @TedShifrin
 
@Balarka: I'm going to crush you in that trash compactor I talked about earlier anyway
 
So, every simplicial complex is a delta complex, but not every delta complex is simplicial.
 
I remember being in a reading group (for the first meeting I didn't show up after that) where it was being explained to me why simplicial sets were the things to be thinking about.
 
I vaguely remember semisimplicial complexes from the beginning of grad school.
 
What is a trash compactor anyway?
 
11:08 PM
Wait. If the "delta" in delta complexes just means "simplex" (because of the shape of the letter)…
Doesn't that mean that "delta complex" literally means "simplicity complex"?
 
Better than complexity complex.
 
words are dumb\
 
@BalarkaSen It gives your trash a finite subcover.
 
@Ted: That's the original language for what are now called simplicial sets I think.
 
Another way to explain the simplicial complex is that it is a simplex where each face is unique right ?
 
11:10 PM
@BalarkaSen I wouldn't be surprised if $“\Bbb C$-complex" were a thing, though.
 
I think they were introduced because a lot of constructions (especially classifying space type constructions) of things related to PL manifolds were easier to write down as very big simplicial complexes than they were as spaces.
Eg try to write down a classifying space of PL concordances.
 
@MikeMiller I bookmarked, I will think about this tomorrow. Will probably sprout nonsense right now, although you might have noticed that the amount of garbage I speak has reduced somewhat.
 
Well, @MikeM, I trashed all my hundreds of pounds of notes, so I can't go back and look.
 
@Ted: That's ok.
Do you still have the shredder? We can put Balarka in it if we get frustrated.
 
Hatcher has a paragraph talking about how the terminology changed
 
11:12 PM
I didn't shred things unless they had social security numbers ... they just went into huge recycle bins.
 
@L33ter Each simplex is unique upto the faces.
 
yes
 
My final Cayley table for the dihedral group $D_6$. Does it look even remotely right? (Sorry to interrupt the flow of conversation).

$$\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\circ & e & r & r^2& r^3& r^4& r^5& f& rf& r^2f& r^3f& r^{4}f& r^{5}f \\
\hline e & e & r & r^2& r^3& r^4& r^5& f& rf& r^2f& r^3f& r^{4}f& r^{5}f \\
\hline r & r & r^2 & r^3 & r ^4 & r ^5 & e & rf & r^2f & r^3f & r^4f & r^5f & f\\
\hline r^2 & r^2 & r^3 & r ^4 & r ^5 & e & r & r^2f & r^3f & r^4f & r^5f & f & rf\\
\hline r^3& r^3 & r ^4 & r ^5 & e & r & r^2 & r^3f & r^4f & r^5f & f & rf & r^2f\\
 
@Akiva: I would be surprised if Hatcher talked about simplicial sets though.
Wow no thanks too big.
 
Section 2.1, second paragraph, talks about terminology
 
11:15 PM
@AkivaWeinberger Probably those are the hypothetical analogues of CW-complexes for complex algebraic varieties.
That's apparently something some people are thinking about.
 
Ah, DogAteMy is right. Hatcher says $\Delta$ complexes used to be called semisimplicial complexes. That explains why I hadn't heard of $\Delta$ complexes when I was a lad.
 
How useful is a Cayley table btw? How much information can one extract from it?
 
@MikeMiller You're too violent today.
 
@user276387: It contains all possible information :)
 
@TedShifrin Makes sense, because delta complexes are a semilinear version of CW-complexes, whereas simplicial complexes are the linear versions.
 
11:17 PM
@Balarka: It's because you say things like "semi linear version of CW complexes".
 
I'll just assume that's something that makes sense
 
@MikeMiller Is that really that bad of a philosophy?
 
@user276387 Which way is the composition? Top composed with the side, or vice versa?
 
@TedShifrin That's wonderful! No wonder my professor is making us draw too many of them.
@AkivaWeinberger column composed with the top.
 
@user276387 Seems like vice versa
 
11:20 PM
@L33ter Do you know what barycentric subdivision is yet?
 
The big problem, as far as I can tell, @user276387, is that it's almost impossible to check from the Cayley table that it's really a group. I mean, you have to check all possible $(a\cdot b)\cdot c = a\cdot (b\cdot c)$. Have fun.
 
no
I have heard of baycentric coordinates though
 
What is "semi linear" supposed to mean?
 
@L33ter OK, you'll learn it eventually. Once you're done, I can recommend you an exercise.
 
alright
 
11:21 PM
@MikeMiller Linear but only sort-of
 
@MikeMiller Almost linear.
 
I really should have done chapter 1 and 0
 
@TedShifrin I was wondering that! And associativity often seems the trickiest axiom to check (for me at least).
 
I am struggling sometimes
*** professor
I will do them in my spare time
 
Yup, @user276387. It's why in practice one prefers to have generators and relations, and then associativity is automatic.
 
11:22 PM
@user276387 Looks right… just check a few random entries to be sure
 
You sound like my students used to, Karim ... whining about mean professor.
 
Thanks for the tautological answer. I don't have the patience for this.
 
@L33ter is Karim?
 
no @TedShifrin He told me to start with chapter 2 and 3 and then move to 1 and 4
 
I know I'm a hypocrite here, but stop changing your names, people
 
11:23 PM
because this course is 7 month course
 
@AkivaWeinberger Many thanks for checking that.
 
You're a hypocrite, DogAteMy ...
 
but I prefer going linearly @TedShifrin
 
@TedShifrin I already said that
 
It's a philosophy, not a rigorous terminology. But I will stop saying that if that annoys you to the point of shredding me!
 
11:23 PM
But homology doesn't depend that much on covering space/fundamental group stuff, Karim.
 
because there is some intuition that I am missing
yeah, but you know some geometrical intuition I am missing
 
I find homology/cohomology much more interesting, actually, but I'm not a topologist.
 
@TedShifrin Chapter 0 develops the geometric intuition.
 
Well, I think you should have done more geometric stuff before algebraic topology in the first place, Karim. So don't whine to me.
 
what do you mean by geometric stuff ?
 
11:25 PM
differential geometry, differential topology ...
 
@Ted: I am not excited by covering spaces, unlike some people. I find them a helpful tool.
 
@MikeMiller I was only joking with the "linear but only sort-of" thing. No idea about Balarka, though.
 
I see yeah
if I know algebraic topology by time I go to grad school will it help e in differential geometry and differential topology ?
when I learn them ?
 
@MikeM: Our qual course spends an inordinate amount of time on the covering space stuff, so I got sick of it in running (voluntarily, of course) the summer study-for-qual classes.
 
@TedShifrin ?
 
11:26 PM
I always did enjoy having them work out deck transformations, though.
 
Covering spaces are nice.
 
Not really, Karim. It goes more the other way.
 
I don't think we're even doing that next quarter. I think we're assuming the students will learn it on their own.
 
Differential geometry is much more concrete, vector calculus stuff at the undergraduate level.
 
I see
 
11:27 PM
Which, @MikeM? Deck transformations?
 
Covering spaces.
 
Covering spaces are closely related to the first homotopy group. I wonder if there's anything similar for the other homotopy groups…
 
Wow ... UGA students sure can't do it on their own.
 
Rip
 
Good question, DogAteMy.
 
11:27 PM
@Akiva: Good question.
 
just a quick question @BalarkaSen to make sure I understand something
 
@Akiva If $p : \tilde{X} \to X$ is a cover, $p$ induces isom on $\pi_n$. But I don't know if there is a notion of covering spaces for homotopy groups.
I think I saw a question on MO.
Let me find it.
 
There's not a good one, no.
 
In some sense, one might think about $K(\pi,n)$, though.
 
You can mimic univeraal covers with Whitehead towers, but in that case things just fit into fibrations.
Right, the statement is that you fit into a fibration with fiber K(pi_n,n-1)
Up to homotopy.
 
11:30 PM
So, we for simplicial homology we have a free abelian group on the delta with bases the open n-simples $e_{\alpha}^n$.
 
@TedShifrin What's $K(\pi,n)$?
 
A space with exactly one non-zero homotopy group $\pi$ for the $n$th .. (abelian when $n>1$).
 
29
Q: Analogue to covering space for higher homotopy groups?

j.c.The connection between the fundamental group and covering spaces is quite fundamental. Is there any analogue for higher homotopy groups? It doesn't make sense to me that one could make a branched cover over a set of codimension 3, since I guess, my intuition is all about 1-D loops, and not sphe...

 
so we can associate each of the open n-simples with a map $\sigma_{\alpha}$, since each point of X is in one of the interior of the delta.
right ?
 
@TedShifrin Oh, I think that was in one of the appendices in Hatcher
 
11:32 PM
My internet is really twingy today.
 
MyDogAte ... it's ok to wait until you're 20 to learn this stuff :D
 
@AkivaWeinberger K(G, 1) was in 1A or 1B, I think.
 
Just quick overview to make sure my understanding is 100 % right before I concentrate on singular homology
 
But I am pretty sure K(G, n) is discussed explicitly in chapter 4.
 
@BalarkaSen are you free
 
11:33 PM
I have no torsion.
 
ok, @Balarka, now that was a bad pun.
I could reply that you're lying because you're far from a planar object.
 
@TedShifrin But that's so far away :(
 
@L33ter I am not sure what that means. Are you doing singular here?
 
no, I want to make sure some details in simplicial homology is correct
 
@TedShifrin I did the same computation I sent you with Brieskorn's original formula and it took about 1 minute for me to write and about 20 seconds to compute the first 100 examples.
 
11:35 PM
What is $\sigma_\alpha$ then?
 
Awesome, @PVAL. Do you understand Brieskorn's algorithm yet?
 
So, we define a delta complex structure on a space X as maps $\sigma_{\alpha} : \Delta^{n_{\alpha}} \rightarrow X$
 
It's very easy to break ${Latex$
 
About to have to leave the beach because there's a person here whose voice is about 20dB above the normal human voice.
 
I am having problems when I added ad blocker to my computer I can't really edit things correctly
the words appear as white, so I can't see them.
Anyway
 
11:37 PM
@TedShifrin That'll be post candidacy I think. It's in German..
 
@L33ter The simplicial chain groups are the free abelian groups generated by $\sigma_\alpha$, correct.
 
my heart bleeds for you, @MikeM.
 
@L33ter Oof
 
I don't know German.
 
yes
 
11:37 PM
I think that's the language its in.
 
exactly @BalarkaSen
 
Tatsächlich, @PVAL :)
 
@TedShifrin You mean your ears bleed for him.
 
Now we have some group homomorphism
from $Cn$ into $C_{n - 1}$
 
Dammit @Balarka I was just about to say that
 
11:39 PM
I should have known better than to come on a holiday.
 
which is defined as same map sigma restricted on the n - 1 simplex and we take addition
as defined in the book
i.e
 
By the way, happy Presidents' Day to all
 
@L33ter Alternating sum of the faces, yes. Go on.
 
@MikeMiller I envy your weather. Or, what I imagine your weather to be.
Definitely different from here… snow is not ideal for beaches.
 
@TedShifrin I also cannot find the paper online.
 
11:41 PM
Now we can check that the boundary map applied twice is zero.
and So, the image of the first boundary map is actually subset of the kernel of the next boundary map.
 
@MikeMiller Oh, so you're on a holiday. Now I know why you're on a better mood than you use to be on.
 
so we can define the homology to be kernel quotient by the image in that way
 
Yes, it's a beautiful day. All the more reason to be consterned by loud people.
 
Yeah, we have a long weekend here in the States @BalarkaSen
 
@PVAL: We're not yet at the point where everything from the ancient past is on-line.
 
11:42 PM
well, geometrically what this does is that it detect the holes in a specific space
in a particular dimension
 
You have not parser that correctly. It is a holiday. I am not on a holiday.
 
@TedShifrin Well I have empirical proof on the correctness of his formula...
 
oke it is good I have everything clear in my head
 
Ah, I see. Why is today a holiday? It's not a weekend.
 
I will discuss with you further after I finish singular homology @BalarkaSen
 
11:44 PM
@L33ter Why?
This is something you need to think through.
 
It's Presidents' Day.
 
which is ?
 
@AkivaWeinberger But ... that means it's holiday for the presidents, right?
Not the citizens.
 
I'm going to regret saying this because I might be wrong, but…
…I think it's in honor of Washington's and Lincoln's birthdays?
Like, a day in between the two birthdays
 
you're correct, MyDogAte.
When I was a kid, my birthday was always a school holiday.
 
11:46 PM
Few
 
brb, I will go make a cup of tea.
 
@PVAL: So you can't get Inventiones from 1966?
 
In any case, it's not for the current president, it's in honor of two past presidents.
 
Yes, we're wrecking my otherwise beautiful Monday in honor of some dead guys... :)
 
@AkivaWeinberger But ... that still means it should be holiday for Washington and Lincoln.
 
11:47 PM
They're dead, though
 
@Balarka: That makes it a holiday for me. My birthday = Lincoln's birthday = Darwin's birthday.
 
Oh? I didn't know that.
@TedShifrin Oh, goodie.
 
Washington was our first president (fought in Revolutionary War). Lincoln was president during the Civil War.
1775-1781 and 1861-1865 respectively, right? The wars, I mean
 
You didn't know Washington and Lincoln were dead? I'm impressed.
 
Sounds approximately correct, yup.
@MikeM: How much do we know about Indian history?
 
11:49 PM
@Ted: I meant that honestly.
 
Uh… Gandhi, and that's about it
Sorry, @Balarka
 
Historically India and the east in general have not had a strong imperial presence in the Americas.
 
I mean, the British ruled, and then they didn't
Oh, and also Pakistan used to not be a thing
 
Well, barring the one time.
 
And then Bangladesh stopped being part of Pakistan
 
11:51 PM
@TedShifrin I found it
 
Wow @PVAL
 
I couldn't indiscriminately copy-paste the title into my search bar to find it though..
 
@MikeMiller India haven't had imperial presence, strong or weak, on anybody.
 
I assume it's on JSTOR, @PVAL ?
 
@AkivaWeinberger I didn't know Gandhi was dead until a few weeks ago when I prepared for the history exams.
 
11:53 PM
now that is bad, Balarka.
 
Well, technically, I lied a bit: I knew Gandhi died, but not that he was assassinated.
 
Today I learned that Gandhi was assassinated
 
The US isn't the only country prone to hate and violence.
 
I'm a bad citizen of the world
 
@TedShifrin Directly through springer
 
11:55 PM
Ah, interesting, PVAL.
 
Hate and violence directly through Springer?
 
How long is it, PVAL?
 
@AkivaWeinberger lol.
 
@TedShifrin 14 pages and I am not seeing the formula I mentioned (or anything I can immediately see as equivalent to it).
 
oh oh ...
 
11:57 PM
Fepends how loose you are with the word "violence".
 
Crushing on a trash compactor sounds violent.
 
I don't know what to teach tomorrow.
 
Nevermind its Satz 3
@TedShifrin
 
Aha ...
Well, I won't volunteer to translate 14 pages, but I can try to help a tiny bit if you need me.
 
Actually no it isn't
 
11:59 PM
glares @PVAL
 
That assumes a larger dimension
 

« first day (2021 days earlier)      last day (3015 days later) »