@all @Alex: So here's what I got: it is clear to me that if we have cones A and B and a face $\sigma$ of their intersection, then we can find two faces f and g so that $\sigma\subseteq f\cap g$, but I am totally stumped how you would show that $f\cap g\subseteq\sigma$. The f and g that I want, fwiw, are the minimal faces in the respective cones which contain $\sigma$ (well-defined because faces are closed under intersection).
We would hope that the minimality of these faces would be good enough, but it seems to be really slippery.
4 hours later…
user147690
05:38
Didn't get to go today btw, we wil be going on (my) thursday instead.
user147690
(also I may have rollbacked one of your edits when you started using the site, without realising it, this may or may not have happened, but if it did it was entirely an accident haha, I thought the [rollback 1 change] was that you had rollbacked a change, and wanted to see what it was, but I may have inadvertently rolled back a change haha)
room topic changed to CRPxTumblr: This chat room is for a research group to discuss the topic of tropical geometry. The team page can be found here. [geometry] [tropical-geometry,]
room topic changed to CRPxTumblr: This chat room is for a research group to discuss the topic of tropical geometry. The team page can be found alexpclark.com/index.php?title=CRPxTumblr_2015 . [geometry] [tropical-geometry,]
room topic changed to CRPxTumblr: This chat room is for a research group to discuss the topic of tropical geometry. The team page can be found at alexpclark.com/index.php?title=CRPxTumblr_2015 . [geometry] [tropical-geometry,]
room topic changed to CRPxTumblr: This chat room is for a research group to discuss the topic of tropical geometry. The team page can be found at alexpclark.com/index.php?title=CRPxTumblr_2015 . [geometry] [tropical-geometry]
Note the link renders within here in the first change above, but it doesn't actually render in the message top right(it just shows as [here](blah)). Tell me if you want it changed to something else(I have seen people come in here numerous times, and probably don't know what it is haha)
@SamiBrooker As soon as you make your first change on the wiki you'll probably start using it more. That would be good xD. I think there is a good amount of information on there now - I agree with Eric about using th recent changes thing, I look at it all the time just in case xD
As I suspected, my problem about faces and intersections is alleviated by going to the other definition. But I guess we would hope the definitions are equivalent :/
hmm the link should have been on "is alleviated"... too late to edit :/
If $S$ is the set of points $x\in\Bbb R^n$ such that $a_1x_1+a_2x_2+\cdots+a_nx_n\geq 0$ and $T$ is the set of points $x\in\Bbb R^m$ such that $b_1x_1+b_2x_2+\cdots+b_mx_m\geq 0$, then
$S\times T$ is the set of points $x\in\Bbb R^{n+m}$ such that $a_1x_1+\cdots+a_nx_n\geq 0$ and $b_1x_{n+1}+\cdots+b_mx_{n+m}\geq 0$
I guess when I normally hear people talking about going back for more degrees (for personal fulfillment) they're talking about masters, but it probably would be hard to jump into a math/astro masters program
[Sorry, I think my gpa's are taking me out to dinner. I'll afk in chat. I hope that Sami will be back soon, and Alex tends to get on at about 11 your time?]
[Which reminds me, is your timezone right? Sami's was not so we gotta do that again XD]
