« first day (671 days earlier)      last day (4365 days later) » 

10:00 PM
But if they reprimand me for kicking somebody out that is annoying the rest, I would go up to the rector if necessary. I cannot believe that this is "correct practice".
If my job (which this is in NL) requires me that I allow people to treat me like an idiot, I quit.
 
I think it's funny that you even care or waste time to think about whether your students are late or not. The tutors here just stand at the board and do their monologue.
 
I make it quite interactive.
It is no problem, if they enter quietly.
 
@JonasTeuwen Sounds cool.
Yet... I think I like books best. They don't talk to me : )
 
i rather not quit as it is paying for my tuition.
 
And when I want to do something else I can just put it down.
 
10:03 PM
Hmm, but I have some degrees already, so I would quit. The pay would be better anyway.
 
Wouldn't want to put down the tutor...
 
@MattN I don't talk to the people that clearly do not want to answer.
 
: )
 
That would be stupid, they would not return.
 
the problem is all the students want only the answer. lol
 
10:05 PM
I should go to bed.
 
Good night everybody
 
Good night xxx
 
I should too but I need to check this flatness nonsense
night !
 
good night!
i should learn to swallow my pride i guess.
 
@Nimza Good night! I hope you understood what I was saying... See you
 
10:06 PM
@MattN Good night, ding ding ding!
@Eugene It cannot be part of the graduate school contract that you should allow people to treat you like a third-class whatever... Is it that bad?
 
@tb thank you again! Due to your help I've cut off a huge part of proof in one theorem. Good night
 
@JonasTeuwen it's just my instructor. he aspires to be a teacher someday that's why he's especially anal.
i've taught other class. they weren't so bad.
and he is my boss this semester so i have to deal with it.
 
Oh.
Hmm, I only have to justify my actions to my promotor.
If necessary. According to my contract he is my direct boss.
 
it's only (hopefully) one semester i think.
 
So they others can run up the tree and complain to him 8-).
 
10:09 PM
@JonasTeuwen that's good. my instructor is my boss in this case though.
 
Yea, that sucks.
 
@Eugene How did grading go?
 
@MattN Oh, I didn't get that you were about to leave, too. See you tomorrow!
Good night.
 
yeah. last semester i was certainly much tougher.
@PeterTamaroff not well. i hope you didn't take offense this afternoon.
 
@Eugene Offense for what? Not well for you or the students?
 
10:11 PM
@PeterTamaroff the whole, i got banned for telling peter i will "kill" you (i'll probably get banned again in fact just for bringing it up)
 
@Eugene "Peter" as in me? I don't remember anything...
 
@PeterTamaroff yes as in you.
 
@Eugene LOL Why did you get mad¿
 
@PeterTamaroff i wasn't mad. i was banned. i said it in jest.
 
@PeterTamaroff Good evening My Liege. May I, unworthy as I am, ask You to take a slice of your most valuable time and spend it to take the honors here?
 
10:14 PM
@tb is it that good a question? i can't tell as i don't have much analysis
 
It's a good question, but it is a duplicate :)
 
of yours i guess?
 
Follow David Mitra's link to see the answer I wrote.
 
@Eugene OH! When I posted the "Stop it, you!" thing. Maybe it was the system. Like automatically.
 
@PeterTamaroff i know it wasn't you
@tb can i just vote for you answer? i dunno if i should reward a duplicate.
 
10:19 PM
I didn't make myself very clear. Sorry. Peter was addressing me in this humble tone, so I tried to make fun of that. But he didn't seem to have gotten it either, I see.
I was asking for votes to close as a duplicate.
 
@tb ah!
 
@Eugene No, no need to vote for my answer unless you genuinely think it is worth it...
 
@tb i do.
 
But thanks for the vote, whoever it was.
 
"Just the finite measures bro".
 
10:20 PM
@Eugene Oh then thank you.
 
@tb i have so few powers here it's not even funny. jordan is more reputable than i am apparently.
 
Pretty ugly dual.
 
@JonasTeuwen But they "cannot reasonnably be represented as functions."
 
@tb What? :P
 
 
10:21 PM
A measure is a function, right... What the?
These comments always confuse me. Like the dirac delta is not a function. Yes it is...?
 
Ask glougloubarbaki. Nomen est ... I guess.
@JonasTeuwen but that's not in the dual of $L^\infty$ :)
You need more than dependent choice to write down an element of $(L^\infty)^\ast$ that doesn't come from $L^1$.
 
Oh, right but we assume full AC in analysis right? Otherwise lots of things would completely suck,
 
^^ That's the upshot of my answer to my question here
 
It is cute to think about these questions, but without (almost full) AC it is pretty worthless.
 
night guys
 
10:25 PM
@tb Cool answer!
 
@JonasTeuwen It depends. I always assume full choice. I want my Krein-Milman, Hahn-Banach and my Alaoglu! Couldn't work without them.
 
@tb What makes it that you are interested in these set theoretic nuisances in analysis?
But apparently Alaoglu is fine with just the ultrafilter lemma ;-).
 
But I need all three of them!
 
gawd. analysis is so complicated!
 
Same with Hahn-Banach, not sure about Krein-Milman.
 
10:26 PM
All three together give you full choice.
 
Oh, kickass.
 
Didn't you read my answer to your question?
:P
 
Oh, yes I did.
 
Quick question: does $\textrm{Ext}(M, -)$ preserve filtered colimits?
 
But I didn't think about it when I said the thing above...
 
10:27 PM
@ZhenLin What's $M$? In an AB5 category it should.
 
An $A$-module. Which is, I'm sure, an inhabitant of a Grothendieck category. Yay!
 
But wait.
 
There's more?
 
yep. jordan is more legit of a mathematician than i am.
 
If $M$ is finitely presented, then it should. Got a condition wrong in my head.
 
10:30 PM
:(
 
Sorry.
 
@Eugene lol
 
@Eugene Uh? What?
 
But what if M has projective dimension $\le 1$? So we have a s.e.s. $0 \to P_1 \to P_0 \to M \to 0$ with $P_1$ and $P_0$ projective.
 
@JonasTeuwen if reputation is to be believed, then jordan is a better mathematician than i am.
 
10:31 PM
@Eugene Don't pull a Jordan on us, dude.
 
@PeterTamaroff lol.
 
@Eugene Hahaha rep is just a game. It's entertaining, though!
 
@PeterTamaroff merely commenting on my MSE powers.
 
@ZhenLin Not even Hom does preserve filtered colimits. Unless $M$ is compact, i.e. finitely presented.
 
@PeterTamaroff really not crazy about rep either.
 
10:32 PM
@PeterTamaroff 8-))).
 
ah
 
Pull a Jordan, Pull a Dubuque... what else do we have?
 
@tb Hahah now I get it. I don't recall adressing you humbly (I seem to be having a memory fade out today).
 
I'm only interested in $\textrm{Ext}^1$, actually. I'm feeling sure that this one works.
 
Pull a Jonas - Don't comb your hair?
 
10:33 PM
@JonasTeuwen Hahaha
 
I actually do comb my hair, but it gets worse.
 
@JonasTeuwen Wait, what's the Dubuque?
 
@PeterTamaroff Do mathematics like this: $\mathrm{f(x) = g(x)}$.
 
Hey will anyone please answer my question.Its here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/154432/…
 
Have you seen the comment?
 
10:34 PM
bleh, it only preserves finite colimits.
 
@meg_1997 I'm not much of a Geometer, but I do have a white board right next to me...
 
@JonasTeuwen It seems that "what was tried" was added.
 
Oh, my apologies in that case.
Anyway, not me. Proving things! 8-).
 
@DylanMoreland i asked cameron stewart about $2$ isogeny and $3$ isogeny and he has no idea either.
 
@JonasTeuwen I like that environment, sometimes....
@meg_1997 Give me a few mins, I have to make some toasts.
 
10:36 PM
@peter take your time..:)
 
@JonasTeuwen I was spending quite a bit of time on showing that something too awful to spell out right now depended on the set-theoretic background you're working in. So I had to come to grips with what's working and what's not working. Before going beyond ZFC, I wanted to understand what's happening between ZF and ZFC
 
@PeterTamaroff when you finally get around to reading baby rudin and papa rudin, you'll be pulling all sorts of jordans!
 
Ah :-). I am just trying to see what we actually use or not...
@Eugene If you are pulling Jordan's after reading "papa Rudin" (Functional analysis?) you're not suited for mathematics. Usually it fails, so...
 
Well, for analysis you're pretty well off with dependent choice. Occasionally you need more, mostly for compactness results in FA.
 
@JonasTeuwen real and complex analysis
 
10:38 PM
That's a pretty easy book. At least, now it is 8-).
I suffered...
 
Or if you want to apply Hahn-Banach in the non-separable setting or stuff like that.
 
@JonasTeuwen i'm not sure how much functional analysis you need to know when doing number theory....
 
@PeterTamaroff You called me Sire and stuff. Never mind.
@Eugene Even GAGA uses some FA.
 
@tb OH but that was some days ago!
 
@Eugene Plenty. Operator theory, functional calculus, harmonic analysis...
 
10:39 PM
@PeterTamaroff I've got a good memory.
 
@tb GAGA?
 
The strangest place I heard Hahn–Banach being invoked was in my Stochastic Financial Models lecture. He said that something was probably provable using a "Hahn–Banach-y argument".
 
@Eugene Certainly for Galois representations, you need something. All the Harish-Chandra stuff, for one thing.
 
"But what if we have no choice, Sir?"
 
@JonasTeuwen i'm pretty sure you don't come across those.
 
10:40 PM
then again, maybe not so surprising, given the amount of random walks...
 
@Eugene I come across them all the time!
 
@Eugene Oh, no I won't. I'll fight those problems to death.
(Though might occasionally ask for hints.) =)
 
@JonasTeuwen aren't you an analyst though?
 
@Eugene GAGA
 
Hmm, maybe I am!
I think it is pretty awesome that for Haar measure we still have Fubini because of the $\sigma$-compactness of the "support".
 
10:42 PM
@tb i'm confused. isn't this complex analysis and topology?
 
@Eugene Not a fan of cohomological number theory, eh? :p
 
@ZhenLin i use what i need.
 
@Eugene sure, but to come to grips with the analytic sheaves you need a bit of FA, like Hahn-Banach.
 
@tb hm.. well maybe i haven't gotten that far yet is the problem.
 
@JonasTeuwen Well, you're working in the most awesome Radon space imaginable.
 
10:44 PM
@ZhenLin and galois cohomology is all i've ever needed.
 
@Eugene It's a very minor thing compared to all the other machines.
 
@tb Uh, really?
 
Really.
 
Great.
 
most certainly i enjoy rudin... oftentimes though only after the fact.
 
10:45 PM
The homogeneity of a topological group + local compactness rules out more or less all measure-theoretic nastiness.
 
@meg_1997 Am I crazy, or shouldn't the angle bisector be perpendicular to BC?
 
Which means: there's plenty of pathology remaining, but not Pathology in the sense of measure theorists.
 
Yep.
 
for instance i hated baby rudin when learning analysis
now i recommend it to everyone.
 
@Eugene Why did you hate it?
 
10:46 PM
Hmm, I hated myself for being too stupid, not the book.
 
when you don't understand the intuition baby rudin is not insightful
slick
but not insightful
 
I was fortunate enough to not have to read any analysis textbooks. Most of my lecturers were good.
 
and i've heard similar complains about papa rudin as well.
 
@JonasTeuwen Thanks again. It's actually my question here I care most about. No wonder it got the least number of votes. But my questions are upvoted like crazy anyway.
 
only papa rudin isn't as slick
 
10:48 PM
@tb Hah, you actually try to figure out who voted? 8-).
 
oh well. you'll be pulling jordans when you FIRST read it then.
 
sitting in philosophy class...
listening to kendrick lamar
 
@Eugene Hmm, the functional analysis book is really great!
 
just thought i would share
 
@JonasTeuwen No, I forgot to thank you for the "cool answer!" thing.
 
10:49 PM
@tb Oh :-). (No need to thank me, of course)
 
@JonasTeuwen i've never had occasion to read it. sorry. allow me to recommend you silverman's AEC as well then! = )
 
Sorry to interrupt: but can we please stop making fun of Jordan?
And while we're at it of Porton?
 
@Eugene What is that about?
 
@tb ok. i'm sorry. i was following the trend in the room. i will stop now.
@JonasTeuwen the arithmetic of elliptic curves.
 
@Eugene Oh, GTM?
 
10:51 PM
@JonasTeuwen yep!
 
Hmm, Jordan, the guy that compared me with Hitler. What the. Fine.
@Eugene My promotor bought the book.
 
@JonasTeuwen LOL Really? What did you do/say to get that?
 
@PeterTamaroff Nothing, really.
 
@PeterTamaroff we should stop peter
 
But, whatever.
 
10:52 PM
@JonasTeuwen what's a promotor?
 
@Eugene Advisor?
 
@tb i apologize again.
 
The one that "promotes" (to doctor).
 
@JonasTeuwen ah. aren't you an analyst??
this puzzles me.
 
@Eugene I don't think we're making fun of Jordan. I usually try to help him. But he seems to have given up.
 
10:53 PM
Uh, what? If you only are an analyst after you have a PhD in analysis I am not an analyst but I hope to be in 2-3 years.
 
@PeterTamaroff he's banned for comparing buddhism to santa claus.
@JonasTeuwen ah i see.
 
@Eugene Jordan is banned for what!? Where did that even come from?
BTW, do we have any Buddhist here?
 
@PeterTamaroff apparently he had a tiff with clarkkent and he made fun of clarkkent for praticing buddhist philosophy
 
@Eugene Oh, OK. I did see some come and goes between Superman and Jordan. Clark seemed to be honestly offended by him, in the sense Jordan "insulted" math constantly.
 
yeah. oh well.
oh i meant to say suspended instead of banned.
 
10:56 PM
Don't have this conversation about people that are not in the position to defend themselves :-).
 
@PeterTamaroff :no the angle bisector need not be perpendicular to BC
 
@JonasTeuwen yup
 
@tb I still can't understand wether Porton has truly made any serious paper or mostly of what he wrote is something that is already known written in other symbology/nomenclature.
 
@JonasTeuwen hopefully this does not imply that we should make fun of him once he's back though.
 
No, that is also not very appropriate here.
 
10:58 PM
@meg_1997 Yes, I just realized that. What can you use? Maybe the sine rule?
 
But as a great man used to say "Whether it is right or wrong, it is sometimes very amusing to break somebody.".
 
@PeterTamaroff in a nutshell, his work is outside the realm of mathematics. he designed his own nomenclature to describe problems he invented.
 
(okay, that does not really fit here, but I like the quote)
 
the math community doesn't take that very seriously
 
@JonasTeuwen You're right about that, but we're saying nothing the guys need to defend themselves about...
 
10:59 PM
Yes, I know, but I don't see anything constructive coming out of the discussion...
 
@PeterTamaroff hopefully that answers your question for good.
@JonasTeuwen interestingly heegner was considered a crank in his time.
until stark tried to prove similar results for his phd thesis and nearly wet his pants when he heard about heegner's proof.
 
@JonasTeuwen I was just informing myself :)
 
luckily heegner's proofs had some gaps that stark fixed. i think they shared credit in the end.
 
@meg_1997 The sine rule will let the harmonic relation appear instantly. Namely, you have $$\sin \alpha /A=\sin \beta /B=\sin \gamma /C$$
 
it's now called the Heegner-Stark theorem
he died before stark proved it though.
math history is so interesting.
 
11:10 PM
@Eugene You should get this one archive.org/details/sourcebookinmath00smit
 
@Eugene Sucks for the guy.
 
@JonasTeuwen it is rather sad.
@PeterTamaroff because that guy has "eugene" in his name?
 
@Eugene That's a pure coincidence
I own the book and it is awesome.
@Eugene I was watching NATGEO the other day. Some quantum physics for the layman and they mentioned Einstein died thinking the ghost effect (is it called like this in English?) was false.
 
@PeterTamaroff ah i see. they are related to math history. recently i've been quite interested in it
 
@Eugene There is a part on the crescent of hyppochrates which is very interesting.
I was the first curve ever studied.
 
11:13 PM
for instance it seems fermat didn't prove his little theorem.
 
And it ended up being trascendental.
Which is interesting.
@Eugene Really?
 
yes. he sent a letter to his friend saying:
(And this proposition is generally true for all progressions and for all prime numbers; the proof of which I would send to you, if I were not afraid to be too long.)
it's nice when your reputation is so great that you get theorems named after you by saying the proof of x is too long for y.
 
@Eugene LOL right.
What still stunns me is how Gauss came up (at the age of 14) with $$\pi(x) \sim \frac x {\log x}$$, empirically.
 
he's awesome like that.
@JonasTeuwen do you know who starred this. maybe we should unstar it.
 
@Eugene I did. I just like to star nonsense, but it is too late to undo.
 
11:19 PM
@Eugene Can't I delete it maybe?
 
It will just drop out eventually.
 
@PeterTamaroff don't think so.
@JonasTeuwen nevermind then. sorry for bringing it up.
 
You can flag for deletion.
 
@JonasTeuwen it's ok
 
Any one here knows where I can find Donald J Newman's proof of the PNT?
And Selgberg Erdös's ?
 
11:21 PM
@PeterTamaroff selberg's is in annals.
 
@Eugene Annals?
of Mathematics?
Rings a bell.
 
@Eugene And how can I find the proof there?
 
whether selberg or erdos gave an elementary proof of PNT is disputed so...
@PeterTamaroff look for the volume and number of the annals journal it was published in
 
@Eugene Oh, I didn't know that. Though it was a fact.
 
11:24 PM
use mathscinet to find out.
@PeterTamaroff here it is
you need access to JSTOR though.
your library might have online access to it
 
@Eugene Hm, not sure. A library here?
 
@PeterTamaroff your university library
 
@Eugene Oh, I doubt it. But I think I have that paper!
Let me check.
 
oh good then
 
@JonasTeuwen In case you might not know, the reason I started using roman fonts in MathJax was due to terrible typesetting in the early releases. Now it is improved somewhat. But I've actually grown fond of the roman fonts.
 
11:30 PM
@BillDubuque Yes, I know. It is no problem, it is just your "trademark" in some way or another :-). (So, that comment was in no means meant to be offensive...)
 
@BillDubuque so that's what it is. i was confused what a dubuque was.
 
@Eugene To most folks, it's a city in Iowa, probably with few Romans...
3
 
@BillDubuque i don't really notice the difference between the fonts though. they look so similar.
 
Well, Bill Dubuque started this, and some other people then followed, that was the "joke".
@Eugene Than you must have worse eyes than I have.
 
@JonasTeuwen probably!
i don't wear glasses though so.
but my eyes are really small so maybe that's why
@BillDubuque are you a number theorist?
 
Tim
11:41 PM
@Eugene small eyes $\neq$ bad vision. Or at least doesn't imply.
 
@Tim i know. i said maybe
 
Tim
@Eugene He is, I believe.
 
@Eugene Number theory is one of my primary interests.
 
cool
 
Tim
@Eugene Bill was working on some CAS decades ago, although I dont know what he has been doing lately. What are you working on lately, Bill? Hi @Bill!
 
11:43 PM
@BillDubuque would you happen to know what the benefit is to computing the rank of an elliptic curve over $\Bbb{Q}$ using $3$-descent is to using $2$-descent?
ah i see. sorry it looks like it might be violating rule 4.
i apologize again.
 
@Eugene Bah its not too big of a deal.
@BillDubuque What is the name of the guy that wrote the essay on $$\frac{\partial}{\partial z}F(z,\alpha)=F(z,\alpha+1)$$? I seem to have lost the file somewhere in my PC.
 
Suppose L is a dense linear order with the order topology. Can an open set in L have a maximal element?
Ah, Bill Dubuque.
I hope it is not in poor taste for me to state that I am a fan of your work.
 
11:58 PM
@Eugene Presumably because 2 descent may fail. e.g. if Sha has order 4, but a 3-descent may work by showing the 3-selmer group is trivial.
@PeterTamaroff Truesdell. Off for dinner now.
 
@BillDubuque interesting. thanks! that is a good answer. i will reflect upon it a little more from that angle now.
 

« first day (671 days earlier)      last day (4365 days later) »