« first day (2276 days earlier)      last day (2750 days later) » 

5:00 AM
Ok, thanks @semiclassical, I think I got it
 
glad I somehow helped, then
 
@Semiclassical Welp
I have too many sines
 
you wrote the mehler kernel wrong. the first factor on the LHS is a square root
 
15 minutes GONE
thanks
ugh, so stupid
 
eh, it's tedious algebra. easy to make mistakes
 
5:06 AM
I copied wrong :P
 
also, you moved $e^{(\eta^2+\xi^2)/2}$ to the LHS but left it on the RHS
I'm glancing at what you've got in the Dropbox link
 
no I divided by two on the RHS
 
you're right, I see it now
 
it's $-(\xi^2+\eta^2)/2$
 
yeah
that's a good move, since then you get $\frac{1}{1-\zeta^2}-\frac{1}{2}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{1+\zeta^2}{1-\zeta^2}=\frac{1}‌​{2i} \cot \omega(t-t_0)$
 
5:10 AM
whoa what
I'm getting the wrong sign on the $xx'$ term, crap
oh
the $i$ gets put in the numerator
 
last factor in what I just said should be $\frac{1}{2i}$, it's displaying wrong for me right now for some reason
 
updated
like one more term to go
got it!
 
nice!
 
@Semiclassical thanks so much
 
like I said, there's nothing truly difficult in there
it's just really laborious and easy to get stuck
glad to help
 
5:16 AM
I just computed $-\frac{1}{1-\zeta^2}+\frac{1}{2}$ the hard way
it works out
 
kk
fun fact, the density of states calculation showed up three times on quizzes/finals
 
three times on quizzes?
 
the 2D case showed up on their last quiz. they bombed it, so the 1D problem was given as a bonus problem to get credit back
and then the 3D case showed up on the final
I graded the first two
 
oh, you grade grad classes?
 
no, this was the intro level quantum course
Eisberg and Resnick was the textbook
less math overall, but a lot of other stuff
 
5:22 AM
other stuff?
 
well, compare the table of contents (link) with what you'd have in Sakurai
you probably haven't had to do any energy level diagrams based on spin-orbit coupling, for instance
 
wth, that's the intro course?
seems way more advanced than Sakurai or Shankar
 
eh, in terms of content it's really not
 
btw final product is one page for that problem
surprisingly short
 
5:26 AM
I didn't show every detail though
Ok I'll do the fifth problem tomorrow.
before class sometime -.-
 
fifth problem should be pretty straightforward, just differentiate and such
 
But I have it already typed up somewhere
@Semiclassical not really...
how do you differentiate the path integral?
 
you have Shankar?
 
well, what's Feynman's expression for the path integral? I honestly don't remember right now
 
5:27 AM
Handy, I mean
I know you have it
 
upstairs
 
page 229 if you're curious
Ok I'm on EST, so I have to go to sleep
Bye, thanks again
 
night
 
 
3 hours later…
8:21 AM
@TedShifrin Thank you! I'm not trying to be metaphysical, I just miss simple facts and wanted to make sure I understand why reparametrizations are defined as they are.
 
 
2 hours later…
user228700
9:52 AM
Hey everyone :-)
 
user228700
I have a quick question about parabolas.
 
user228700
My textbook says that if given the length if the latus rectum, the equation of the axis (line of symmetry) and the focus of the parabola, it is possible to specify its equation.
 
user228700
Isn't this only partly true, tho? Of course, if I move $2a$ ($4a$ being the given length of latus rectum) units to the left of the focus, and draw a perpendicular line, then that will be my directrix and now, I've got my parabola.
 
user228700
But I could just as well move $2a$ units to the right of the focus and do the same thing.
 
user228700
And I'd get two different parabolas, right? One would be concave and the other convex.
 
10:38 AM
@Kaumudi why is this only partly true?
 
user228700
Because of the reason I stated after I claimed that it is only partly true.
 
I see
I think you are right
 
10:56 AM
@DMHO
Hi
@ArshadAli hi
@Kaumudi Hi
 
user228700
@DHMO Hm.
 
user228700
For two parabolas to be equal, they must have the same value of $a$
 
user228700
That's what my book says.
 
user228700
@Prasanna: Hello.
 
user228700
@DHMO: But of course, by translating/rotating the parabolas (which is what we are essentially doing to get diff. parabolas with the same $a$), we change literally everything about the parabola, except the length of its latus rectum.
 
user228700
11:05 AM
I guess it's just defined like that?
 
@Kaumudi It is not saying that if they have the same $a$ then they are the same (whatever it means for something to have an $a$). It is saying the converse
 
user228700
(Of course, for the standard equations of a parabola, where we already know which directrix to choose and we're given the sign of $a$, we can definitely have only one parabola.)
 
user228700
@TobiasKildetoft I think the converse is also true.
 
@Kaumudi you changed the focus as well?
 
That becomes a matter of when we call parabolas equal
 
user228700
:-P I've watched that.
 
user228700
That's...not exactly what I'm getting it.
 
user228700
Never mind, it's just defined like that.
 
95
A: Mathematical "urban legends"

Igor RivinHere is a story I heard many years ago, and have no confirmation of: Apparently, there was Asst Professor X at a provincial department Y, and he was up for tenure. Professor X's advisor was a famous Japanese mathematician Z at an Ivy League school. Naturally, he was asked for a letter, which he ...

Can someone explain this to me?
 
@DHMO which part don't you understand?
 
11:23 AM
@TobiasKildetoft what does "third rate" mean?
 
@DHMO worse than second rate
 
what does rate mean?
 
@DHMO nothing on its own in this context. Are you familiar with the term "first rate"?
 
no
 
then probably that is the issue. It is a term for something that is great, and by extension second rate is not so great (third rate is hardly ever used)
 
11:28 AM
then where is the funny point?
 
getting too long to explain I think
 
??
 
It is funny because of its unusual use of certain English terms. It gets too long to explain to someone not familiar with those terms
 
i mean, what term should be used in the letter to replace second rate?
 
Not any particular one (though obviously one that confers something positive rather than negative)
 
user228700
11:36 AM
I've a quick question (again :-P). I'm given the equation of a parabola and been asked to find the equation of the circle having center at the focus of this parabola and it's also given that the circle touches the parabola.
 
user228700
I've attempted it and got the answer but I want to know what the perfect reasoning is, behind my steps. I'm afraid mine may not be correct, even tho I got the correct answer.
 
user228700
Anyone? What would u take the radius to be?
 
11:53 AM
46
A: Mathematical "urban legends"

algoriI am not sure where or when this happened, but I still think there may be some truth to the story. Once someone from the engineering (or physics?) department of some university came to see Joseph Bernstein and asked if he knew a formula for a conformal mapping of the interior of a regular $n$-go...

could anyone explain this to me?
 
@DHMO I am not sure, but I think the point is that the formula is much easier in the case he was really interested in, and getting it by taking a limit is probably really hard
 
@TobiasKildetoft i'm more interested in, you know, the actual formula
 
@DHMO That I have no idea about
 
@DHMO For the unit disk, $z \mapsto i \frac{1+z}{1-z}$. For the (regular) $n$-gon, google "Schwarz-Christoffel formula". It's a tiny bit more complicated.
 
12:15 PM
@DanielFischer thanks
 
Hi, I am trying to find a big oh order of $2np(1-p)_2F_1(-n+1,1/2;2;4p(1-p))$ with $p\in(0,1)$ and integer $n>2$, as $n\to\infty$, where $_2F_1$ is a hypergeometric function. Any ideas? I can find a closed form only when $p=1/2$
 
user228700
Anybody, pls?
 
1:24 PM
28
A: Mathematical "urban legends"

Sean TilsonI have heard (from two sources) that at the University of Chicago a senior faculty member was temporarily banned from teaching undergraduate courses. The reason is that during a first semester undergraduate linear algebra course he did everything over the Quaternions. This one isn't so much acad...

What would Linear Algebra over the quaternions look like?
 
2:06 PM
10
A: Mathematical "urban legends"

maproomI heard this in Oxford in 1970. I can't believe it: A PhD student decides to see what happens if he assumes the inverse of the triangle inequality. He finds he can prove that there are various interesting consequences - for instance, certain sets of points must be collinear. He eventually writ...

What does "inverse of triangle inequality" mean
 
2:49 PM
@DHMO Complicated.
 
Exactly the same, but without determinants.
 
T/F: $\displaystyle A \otimes B = 0 \implies A = 0 \lor B = 0$
@MikeMiller for example?
 
I don't understand how I can give an example of that.
 
The noncommutativity worries me.
 
@MikeMiller are you talking about triangle inequality?
 
2:52 PM
Everything works fine, except determinants. Noncommutativity breaks those.
No.
 
alright
 
Makes sense.
 
I don't understand why the condition I posted above involving the Kronecker product is false.
 
Ok, now that I am finally a little free, I can actually do some math.
@DHMO What makes you think that's false?
 
195
A: Examples of common false beliefs in mathematics

Martin BrandenburgHere's my list of false beliefs ;-): If $U$ is a subspace of a Banach space $V$, then $U$ is a direct summand of $V$. If $M/L, L/K$ are normal field extensions, then the same is true for $M/K$. Submodules/groups/algebras of finitely generated modules/groups/algebras are finitely generated. The ...

The 6th item
 
2:59 PM
It's true for vector spaces. They're not talking about vector spaces.
 
what are they talking about?
 
Weird rings with zero divisors and anything like that would be false
You can probably cook up one in Z/6.
 
what does $\otimes$ even mean?
 
Google is your friend.
 
what am I even supposed to search
circled multiplication?
I only know Kronecker
 
3:02 PM
you just said kronecker product.
 
but isn't it for matrices?
 
they're precisely talking about matrices so I don't see the issue. in any case if you don't know what $\otimes$ means then you probably shouldn't care about when $A \otimes B$ is zero or not
 
oh, you mean in Z/6, [2]\otimes[3]=[0]
 
no, that's not what he means. It's called a tensor product. Why would you assume you can parse everything on the list?
 
@MikeMiller then what would be a counterexample?
 
3:05 PM
he's writing down a 1x1 counterexample, though, which is fine
 
@BalarkaSen If I have one mole of UC (uranium carbide), there is one mole of U and one mole of C, right?
 
shrug man
 
@0celo7 yes
where is the mathematics chat? I accidentally entered the chemistry chat
 
My nuclear physics TA and prof both say you get 1/2 mole of each o.o
 
@0celo7 then they are both wrong
 
3:09 PM
that's what I said
 
@0celo7 supply them with the definition of mole to convince them
Here is a belief I actually hold: "The derivative of a differentiable function is continuous."
 
The TA said she'll talk to the prof.
 
How is this false?
 
@DHMO $x^2\sin(1/x)$.
for $x\ne 0$, and $=0$ when $x=0$.
 
@0celo7 what for $x\ne0$?
 
3:13 PM
$f(x)=x^2\sin(1/x)$ for $x\ne 0$ and $f(0)=0$.
Piecewise function.
 
oh
 
This is the usual counterexample for such things
It generalizes to higher order derivatives, too
 
A differentiable function can have infinitely many discontinuities, even
 
$f'(0) = \displaystyle\lim_{h\to0}\dfrac{h^2\sin(1/h)}{h} = \displaystyle\lim_{h\to0}h\sin(1/h) = 0$
 
@SteamyRoot What function do oyu have in mind?
 
3:15 PM
you know, this is why I am so absorbed in mathematics
 
None straight away.
 
integral of the Weierstrass function, perhaps
 
but if you have such function with a single discontinuity, take a part around that discontinuity
 
@0celo7 the anti-derivative of Weierstrass function
 
and glue it to itself in a differentiable way infinitely many times
 
3:16 PM
@BalarkaSen I swear I wanted to say that
 
@DHMO wait
How do you know about Weierstrass but not that diff functions need not be $C^1$
 
relevant post:
20
Q: What does the antiderivative of a continuous-but-nowhere-differentiable function "look like"?

silvascientistWeierstrass' function is an example of a function that is continuous, but nowhere differentiable, and can be visualized as being "infinitely wrinkled". I'm having trouble, however, imagining how the integral of such a function would appear. All the techniques that I know of for approximating func...

@0celo7 because I'm stupid?
 
@BalarkaSen Well I'm stupid because the derivative is just the Weierstrass function, no?
Which is of course continuous.
 
wait, what?
 
3:18 PM
@SteamyRoot 's claim is not very good
Infinitely many is not hard
Dense or something would be more impressive
 
what do you mean?
well, if you want the exact claim
 
@DHMO the Weierstrass thing doesn't work, he means
 
Then you should read up on the baire category theorem
 
@BalarkaSen I know
 
Then why the hell did you suggest it?
 
3:19 PM
I thought integratable functions need to be almost everywhere continuous
@0celo7 because I'm stupid?
so there cannot be a function whose derivative is nowhere continuous
 
@SteamyRoot we're doing that in analysis now
but not with derivatives
 
Relevant post:
10
Q: Is Dirichlet function Riemann integrable?

Vladimir"Dirichlet function" is meant to be the characteristic function of rational numbers on $[a,b]\subset\mathbb{R}$. On one hand, a function on $[a,b]$ is Riemann integrable if and only if it is bounded and continuous almost everywhere, which the Dirichlet function satisfies. On the other hand, th...

 
do you have a reference?
 
The derivative of a differentiable function is continuous on a dense G_$\delta$-set.
 
What about that one function
that's continuous on $\Bbb I$
but not on $\Bbb Q$
could one integrate that? probably not
 
3:22 PM
@0celo7 what is $\Bbb I$?
 
not integrable
actually rationals are measure 0 so maybe
 
oh, $\Bbb R\backslash\Bbb Q$?
 
@DHMO $\Bbb R-\Bbb Q$
 
I see
 
meh
 
3:23 PM
The Thomae function?
 
@SteamyRoot Seriously, what's the reference for this?
@DHMO Yes
How the hell do you know about Thomae but not about $x^2\sin(1/x)$?
 
I don't know one right away. It can be proven rather easily with Baire...
 
2
Q: Is Thomae's function Riemann integrable?

ghshtaltLet $\displaystyle f: [0,1] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ given by $$f(x) = \begin{cases} 0 & x \notin \mathbb{Q} \\ \\ 0 & x = 0 \\ \\ \frac{1}{q_x} & x = \frac{p_x}{q_x} \in \mathbb{Q} \backslash \{0\}, \ p_x \in \mathbb{Z}, \ q_x \in \mathbb{N}, \ \text{gcd}(|p_x|, q_x) = 1 \end{cases}$$ I...

7 mins ago, by DHMO
@0celo7 because I'm stupid?
 
That's not a valid answer.
 
@0celo7 what is?
 
3:25 PM
@SteamyRoot "rather easily"
 
If you want one badly, try it yourself or look for one?
 
I don't know how to approach it
 
I duck outta this
 
12
Q: How to show that the set of points of continuity is a $G_{\delta}$

LindaI am trying to solve this exercise from Royden's 3rd edition. The question is as follows: Let $f$ be a real-valued function defined for all real numbers. Show that the set of points at which $f$ is continuous is a $G_{\delta}$. Let $$A_n = \{y : \text{there is a }~\delta_y \gt 0 : |f(s)-f(...

 
@SteamyRoot Yes, I know that.
But you said the set of continuity of a differentiable function is a dense $G_\delta$.
 
3:26 PM
587
Q: Examples of common false beliefs in mathematics

gowersThe first thing to say is that this is not the same as the question about interesting mathematical mistakes. I am interested about the type of false beliefs that many intelligent people have while they are learning mathematics, but quickly abandon when their mistake is pointed out -- and also in ...

 
That's a stronger and different claim
 
Why is everything here community wiki?
 
So every dense $G_\delta$ is the continuity set of a diff function
But what about the other way around?
Wonder if those notes have it
Nope
 
Okay, another minute or 3 in google: math.stackexchange.com/questions/292275/…
 
3:35 PM
@0celo7 err, a function that's differentiable at a point is continuous there
the continuity set of a differentiable function is $\Bbb R$
 
So apparently it's Theorem 2.2, p. 34 of Andy Bruckner's "Differentiation of Real Functions"
 
@MikeMiller Oh we're talking about the continuity set of the derivative
I misspoke above.
 
ah, that's more interesting
 
(not original)
guess what this picture means
 
Either way, this question is still open: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1937465/…
 
3:37 PM
higher homotopy groups are abelian, 'course
 
bingo
19 mins ago, by DHMO
I thought integratable functions need to be almost everywhere continuous
18 mins ago, by DHMO
so there cannot be a function whose derivative is nowhere continuous
 
Hatcher
page 340
 
bingo
 
Can you explain in 1 sentence what that picture means?
 
he just did
 
3:42 PM
That picture makes absolutely no sense
Although the explanation in Hatcher does.
A picture is worth -1000 words, as usual.
 
@0celo7 that's fine
 
Can anyone explain this to me?
84
A: Proofs without words

Vaughn ClimenhagaIt's a long list of wonderful answers already, but I can't resist... Question: Is it possible to find six points on a square lattice that form the vertices of a regular hexagon? Proof without words: Hint: A square lattice is invariant under rotation by π/2 around any lattice point. Use redu...

 
bleh i really should work more
 
What the hell is QM?
 
quantum mechanics
 
3:47 PM
seriously
 
oh, in that picture?
the line going from the bottom of the small circle to the top of the big semicircle, I think
 
thank you
seriously
 
idk what more you want.
 
@0celo7 AM is arithmetic mean; GM is geometric mean; HM is harmonic mean.
 
ah
quantum mean
$\langle\psi|X|\psi\rangle$
 
3:52 PM
??
 
Is there a reference in a book to the fact that if $Y -> X$ is a finite covering, then $X$ compact implies $Y$ compact?
 
@abenthy Finite covering meaning $p^{-1}(x)$ is finite for each $x\in X$?
 
Exactly, its sometimes called "finite-sheeted"
I can find several proofs in the internet, but I would like to cite something instead of copying a proof.
 
Oh, did you check Hatcher or Munkres?
 
Ah thank you, I somehow forgot to check Hatcher. He does state it (together with Hausdorffness) at p.79 in an exercise
 
4:03 PM
Hmm, why is Hausdorffness necessary?
So that compact sets are closed?
 
It isn't
But for my application, both spaces are manifold anyway.
 
Oh, I see
 
It is unknown if e^(e^(e^(e^e))) is an integer??
 
@DHMO probably because its huge and calculating it numerically to precision $<1$ is hard
 
@s.harp no mathematical argument available?
 
4:15 PM
I know next to nothing about number theory and properties of transcendental numbers, so maybe?
 
no, there would be no general theorem that could help with that
 
anyway, 4 powers of $e$ is roughly $2\, 10^{1656520}$, so calculating the powerseries up to a term where $10^{n 1656520}/n!$ because smaller than $1$ will take forever D:
 
4:26 PM
How would one even prove such a thing without direct computation?
 
230
Q: Not especially famous, long-open problems which anyone can understand

David FeldmanQuestion: I'm asking for a big list of not especially famous, long open problems that anyone can understand. Community wiki, so one problem per answer, please. Motivation: I plan to use this list in my teaching, to motivate general education undergraduates, and early year majors, suggesting t...

This is very humbling
@MikeMiller about rationality?
 
Hello.
 
How to express $5^6$ with 29 $1$'s with only addition and multiplication?
e.g. $10 = (1+1+1)\times(1+1+1)+1$
 
4:48 PM
Hello!!
Let $F$ be a field and $C$ an algebraic closure of $F$.
We have that $\tau:C\rightarrow C$ is a $F$-monomorohism.
Does the following hold?
$F\subseteq C\Rightarrow \tau (F)\subseteq \tau (C)$
 
4:59 PM
@DHMO where did you get that problem?
@MaryStar if $A\subset B$ then $f(A)\subset f(B)$ for any subsets $A,B$ and any function $f$
 
Ah ok...
Since $\tau:C\rightarrow C$ is a $F$-monomorohism, do we have that $\tau (a)=a, \forall a\in F$ ? @s.harp
 
5:20 PM
I take that $F$-monomorphism meants $\tau(fc)=f\tau(c)$ for all $f\in F$, $c\in C$?
and $\tau(f+g)=\tau(f)+\tau(g)$ for all $f,g\in F$
well ignore the second statemnt, i wasnt thinking there
@MaryStar what do you mean here with an $F$ monomorphism
 
5:36 PM
$F$-isomorphism means $\psi (a)=a, \forall a\in F$.
What is then the definition of $F$-monomorphism? I got stuck right now... @s.harp
 
6:04 PM
At an monomorphism the mapping must be onto, right? @s.harp
 
6:20 PM
Why do they say E_i_n instead of simply E_i, texpaste.com/n/jwslyo7
 
7:16 PM
@DHMO $$(1+1+1+1+1)^{1+1+1+1+1+1}+1-1+1-1+\\1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1$$
 
@LittleAlien Because they are not only considering the first $n$ variables, but any possible collection of $n$ of them
 
7:35 PM
Ugh @DogAteMy :D
 
@TedShifrin Hi
 
7:51 PM
@AkivaWeinberger how the heck did you come up with that
also, he said addition
not subtraction
 
@TedShifrin Hello.
So little people here (._.)
 

« first day (2276 days earlier)      last day (2750 days later) »