« first day (1580 days earlier)      last day (3442 days later) » 

7:03 PM
Nvm, I'm completely lost...
 
there was a table a while ago published about where US faculty members did their undergrad studies
does anyone remember where this was?
 
Sadly, I don't know what you're referring to @dorothy
 
@teadawg1337 shame but thanks
the answer was the US and indea
india
but I can't find it
 
@Chris'ssis: I know you've used Cesàro summation in the past. Have you seen this? $$\sum_{k=1}^\infty(-1)^k\sqrt{k}=(2\sqrt2-1)\zeta\left(-\frac12\right)$$
The partial sums are not even bounded
 
7:19 PM
@robjohn Yeah, I think I saw it.
@robjohn it should be also in other places on MSE, I'm sure of that.
 
I think people are overestimating my experience level... I'm legally considered an adult, but I'm still a teenager...
 
@WillHunting Did you go jogging?
 
@Chris'ssis Nope. It's 3 am here, lol.
 
@WillHunting It's never too late for going jogging :-))))))
 
@Chris'ssis So, how is the progress of your book? Will it be ready for publication next year?
 
7:30 PM
@WillHunting We'll see.
 
So this is the early crowd(for me), seems the same as the late crowd + mid day crowd(-15 people)
 
:)
 
@Chris'ssis It's certainly never too late to go jogging, but it's far too cold here
 
@teadawg1337 I live in hell. It's too hot here.
 
@teadawg1337 Ah, I see.
 
7:39 PM
@Chris'ssis Are you happy living in your country? I am very unhappy here, which is why I said I live in hell.
 
@WillHunting I'd be very happy if I got a good job here ...
 
@Chris'ssis OK. I think you should just quit and become a mathematician.
 
@WillHunting Why are you unhappy in your country? I heard a lot of nice things about Singapore.
 
@Chris'ssis My location is meant to be a secret, lol.
 
Girlfriend is gone now. Alone for a week.
 
7:42 PM
@WillHunting hmmm, interesting. :-)
 
@Chris'ssis Very often, one will only hear good things about a country and not the bad things.
 
@WillHunting From what I have read, your country is in a big brother society
 
I live in Antarctica, lol.
 
@WillHunting That's true as well.
 
@WillHunting The USA is one of the exceptions. I hate living in America, politics is given way too much power over everything
 
7:46 PM
@teadawg1337 That's the same with most places. Do you want to take that control away?
 
@teadawg1337 I am actually trying to move there one day, lol. I think you are very lucky to be American.
 
@WillHunting Come to Australia :). We are much nicer
 
America is great and all, but I'm hoping to move to England one day
 
My favourite country is Germany. I hope to be born there in my next life.
 
Huy
@WillHunting: Didn't you say you wouldn't nickchange anymore, at some point?
 
7:50 PM
@Huy Yes, I did. I broke my promise, sorry. I might break more promises in future.
 
I just don't think America has its same appeal as it used to. It's been pretty much going downhill since the late 1950's
 
Huy
@WillHunting: Breaking promises is not very good.
 
@Huy Better than breaking cups.
 
Huy
@teadawg1337: I'm surprised to see some people still find America to be appealing at all.
@WillHunting: Depends, really.
 
I am going crazy. I cannot find the area of a triangle.
 
7:51 PM
.5bh
 
Hi @Alizter Sarah replied to my email yesterday, with one word, lol.
 
I have a triangle at (-1, 0), (3, 3) and (4, 0)
 
@Alizter Use the shoe lace formula.
 
Two of the coordinates lie along the x-axis, so that simplifies things greatly
 
sure
but why are the lengths I am computing wrong?
 
7:53 PM
@Alizter Have you tried drawing a picture?
 
If I draw a perpendicular down the middle
 
Huy
@Alizter: What did you compute wrongly?
 
It is 3
so 3 - 4 - 5 triangle
So the long length is 5?
Same logic with the other side I get 3 - 1 which gets me root 10
Do I need more sleep?
 
The length between (-1,0) and (3,3) would be 5, there's the 3-4-5 triangle
The height is 3, the base is 5, $A=\frac12bh$
 
@Alizter Yes, I think so.
 
7:55 PM
So the area is not 5 root 10
 
Are you trying to find the area of the triangle enclosed by the three coordinates you've listed, or the area of one of the two smaller triangles formed by drawing a vertical line down from (3,3)?
 
Yup
Am I doing it incorrectly
 
I think Alizter just needs sleep.
 
Down from 3,3
which leaves me 1 - 3 - root 10 on the right
 
@Alizter So you're trying to find the area of the triangle to the right of the vertical line from (3,3)?
 
7:58 PM
Just use half base times height, whatever the case.
 
Well I am trying to find the area of the rectangle but I am unsure why this method is not working
 
@Alizter Rectangle or triangle, lol.
 
I'm sorry, what rectangle??
 
triangle
shhh
same thing
 
Alizter is sleep deprived. Just go to bed and you will find the answer when you wake up.
 
8:00 PM
I am sure this is wierd
 
Until now, we still don't know what your problem is.
@teadawg1337 Alizter is very smart, he just needs sleep. I am sure he can find the area of a triangle.
 
@WillHunting I just checked his profile, I agree
 
If I have the triangle (-1, 0), (3, 3) and (4,0). The area should be 3 x 5 over 2.
 
Yes
 
So why is it that I compute 5 root 10 over 2
 
8:02 PM
@Alizter And how did you get that?
 
Because I draw a perpendicular from (3, 0) to (3, 3).
 
That length is 3
 
The left triangle should give hypotonuse as 5
the RHS triangle should give hypo as sqrt 10
therefore 5 sqrt 10 / 2
I suck badly at geometry
 
Wait, wouldn't the RHS have a hypotenuse of $\sqrt{26}$?
Oh, derp. nvm
 
I am too lazy to draw a picture. I will leave teadawg to help Ali, lol.
 
8:05 PM
Help me ;-;
 
This is more difficult than Galois Theory.
 
lol jk, I think i've got this
 
title I have a question guys, thanks for the help.
 
@Alizter You know what your error is? If the triangle is ABC with A(-1,0) B(3,3) and C(4,0), then the line segments AB and BC aren't orthogonal. Hence the discrepancy in answers
 
8:07 PM
@teadawg1337 LOL.
 
@Alizter Are you familiar with dot products between vectors? That's how I wanna prove it right now
 
@teadawg1337 I think there is a mistake with the exercise then. It told be that they were orthogonal.
 
....
Hang on, lemme double check using vectors
The line segment AB corresponds to the vector $4i+3j$, and the line segment BC corresponds to the vector $i-3j$. In order for two vectors to be orthogonal, the dot product must be zero. However, the dot product between these two vectors turns out to be $4-9=-5$
NOWHERE NEAR ORTHOGONAL
 
I look at the gradients and see 3/2 and -3
 
@teadawg1337 LOLLOL
 
8:14 PM
Does the textbook seriously say those two line segments are orthogonal?
 
Well, we all make mistakes.
 
But in a published textbook...
I drew a diagram, the angle between the two segments is clearly acute
 
School math textbooks are particularly prone to mistakes, I feel.
@teadawg1337 The author clearly lacked sleep, like Alizter, lol.
 
@WillHunting But this is what editors are for, right???
Isn't that how writing books works?
 
@teadawg1337 I think the word editor on a school math textbook doesn't really mean the editor looked through everything.
 
8:20 PM
Well dang, maybe I should edit school math textbooks then...
 
@teadawg1337 No matter how many editors there are, there may still be mistakes. Man is not God, and even God makes mistakes.
 
Wait, the dot product between them is actually -9
That's even worse....
 
3
Q: Class of Lebesgue-Lebesgue measurable functions?

user116457A function $f:\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^m$ is Lebesgue-Lebesgue(-Borel) measurable iff inverse images of Lebesgue(-Borel) measurable sets are Lebesgue(-Borel) measurable. It is known that continous functions are borel-measurable and so every homeomorphism is Borel both ways. Is it true to concl...

 
@teadawg1337 It's just whether it is 0 or not, doesn't make it worse, lol.
 
True, true
Oh, wait, it's not -9. It's -5.
I second-guessed myself and thought of cross products for some reason. Maybe I need more sleep as well
 
8:25 PM
Now @teadawg1337 needs sleep too, lol.
 
I'm really stuck trying to prove that the euclidean norm is measurable from the lebesgue sigma algebra to the lesbegue sigma algebra...
it's supposed to be obvious, but i don't have any theorems i can use. My strategy is proving that a positive measure set is mapped to a positive measure set, but i don't see a way to do it yet.
 
@user116457 Sorry, I'm not an expert with measure theory. I'm not an expert with anything, really; I'm not even attending college until next semester
 
Thank you @teadawg1337
 
@Alizter My pleasure
 
8:40 PM
@teadawg1337 What will you be studying?
 
@WillHunting Why, mathematics of course
 
@teadawg1337 OK. Don't forget me when you win the Fields medal.
 
I might try to get a double major in mathematics and physics, I'm not sure yet
Jeez, most of the questions today look like unlabeled homework questions...
 
"WinterBash 2014 is scheduled to begin December 15th."
hmph
 
Two weeks?? Bummer...
 
8:47 PM
@MikeMiller how can i prove that the euclidean norm is measurable from the lebesgue sigma algebra to the lesbegue sigma algebra?
 
don't ask me
 
@user116457 Just be patient, someone will post an answer to that question eventually. Some questions can't be answered immediately and require some thinking to truly get anywhere on
 
If you want an answer and nobody here can help, you should probably post on the main site.
 
Which he/she did
 
It's true i kind of did...
 
8:51 PM
Then wait patiently.
 
I'll won't pester you guys any longer
 
I just don't think anyone around right now is qualified to help you; sorry.
 
@Chris'ssis I looked a bit, but did not see it. It was not a thorough search, however. If you find it, let me know.
 
Hmmm, the questions are kinda boring today... Maybe I'm just too tired to truly appreciate some of them, idk
 
9:12 PM
@robjohn OK
@teadawg1337 I prepared the proof for you.
 
@Chris'ssis Alrighty, I just need to practice with using summation as well as integration
I've been skipping around in textbooks too much
 
@teadawg1337 take it
@robjohn see my way above.
 
@Chris'ssis Ah. I haven't tried to modify my other approach yet.
 
@robjohn OK
 
@Chris'ssis It seems most approaches are going to series.
 
9:21 PM
@robjohn The problem with this one is that if one doesn't approach it properly then one might meet ugly situations.
 
Ah, I was on the verge of reaching that solution but I stopped about halfway
I'm just not feeling very motivated or energetic today
 
@robjohn using your way I think you reach at a certain point $$-\int_0^{\pi/2} \log(\sin(x)) \tan\left(\frac{x}{2}\right) \ dx$$
 
@Chris'ssis which looks awfully familiar
 
@robjohn Yeap.
 
Ugh, the edit approval process takes a while...
 
9:38 PM
there's nothing in the queue
if yours didn't show up it was probably rejected
 
All 16 of my suggestions have been approved, not a single one rejected
 
Oh, I thought you were waiting on one now. I misread.
 
I was, it just took a little bit longer than usual
I realize that the review process is performed by actual people, so there's an understandable delay
 
@robjohn Do you see a nice way of finishing it from that point?
 
What on earth does integration have to do with this question???
I ask because the tag doesn't seem to fit...
 
10:02 PM
@teadawg: when you do probability with continuous probability distributions (not discrete problems), you do so with integrals and measure theory.
 
@TedShifrin Hm, sounds quite interesting! I'll try to read up on measure theory when I get a chance
 
10:29 PM
how do I compute $\int \frac{1}{1-x^2}dx=\frac{1}{2}(\log(-x-1)-\log(x-1))$?
 
partial fractions @Twink
P.S. You want absolute values on your arguments of $\log$
 
@TedShifrin thanks :D
 
how's things Ted
 
Stewing over my 8 letters of recommendation for grad schools ... two pretty much done.
One of my failing students in probability stood up and walked out of class with 10 minutes left. I was so pissed.
 
I thought you only had 3 letters left? and yeech at the student.
I'm not going to bother writing a final review guide since the one for the midterm was clearly a waste of my time.
 
10:45 PM
Yeah, it's better to make them do it and bring their results to recitation.
 
@TedShifrin Hello
@TedShifrin Can you check my answer here please ? It seems wrong math.stackexchange.com/questions/1047261/…
 
Salut, @Hippa. Tu ne t'en dors pas?
 
@Ted unfortunately I don't have that power...
 
@TedShifrin Maths > Sleep
 
You don't? @Mike
 
10:47 PM
I can't impose a grade on it, @Ted
 
no, no grade ... but you can have them turn in key topics on index cards ... and put them on the board ... discuss.
 
Guys I have a question, why do we need $\overline{R(V-I)}=H$? Isn't it enough to have $R(V-I)=H$?
 
@Hippa: Ross is right. This is one of the "fractal" types of probability problems you should do without summations.
Use Bayes's Formula.
 
@TedShifrin Uh ? Under what conditions ?
(and why doesn't my formula work ?)
 
Condition on the event that there's success on the first throw.
$E$ is the event $X_k=Y_k$ for some $k$. $P(E) = P(E|F)P(F) + P(E|F^c)P(F^c)$, where $F$ is the event that $k=1$.
 
10:53 PM
I know the formula
 
I haven't looked at your formula.
 
Please do :-)
 
But make sure you can do it my way. I've stressed this in my class.
 
$1/11$ is correct.
 
10:54 PM
What's $F^c$ for you ? I know $\bar{F}$
@TedShifrin :O
 
Same thing, @Hippa.
 
Sorry for the not so related question.
Anyone knows how can i prove that the euclidean norm is lesbegue-lesbegue measurable?
 
Lua is lying to me then :/
@TedShifrin Thanks anyway
 
You're changing names, now, @Saal?
 
iit was asked here earlier
no i was trying to prove it
i take measure theory too
 
10:55 PM
Being able to do it both ways is a powerful tool, @Hippa. You should get $P(E) = \dfrac1{36} + \left(\dfrac56\right)^2 P(E)$.
 
@TedShifrin Give me 2 secs, my pen seems to have gone on strike
 
You need a pen?
 
Probably not
 
the fact is i have no idea how to prove that something is lesbegue-lesbegue measurable without resorting to the outer-measure and inner measure definition and proving equivalence
 
I don't even know what Lebesgue-Lebesgue measurable means.
 
10:57 PM
@TedShifrin Well Probably yes because I don't use the same notations
 
glares @Hippa
 
@TedShifrin I write $P_B(A)$ where you write $P(A\mid B)$
 
Ah.
 
pretty straight forward, it means measurable from the lebesgue sigma algebra to the lesbegue measurable sigma algebra
 
@TedShifrin "F is the event that k=1." I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean.
Oh wait
 
10:59 PM
ah, ok, I've never in my entire life heard that, @Saal.
 
Why do we need $\overline{R(V-I)}=H$? Isn't it enough to have $R(V-I)=H$?
 
Just $P(F)=1/36$ ?
 
@Hippa: I meant that the agreement occurs on the first throw.
 
Oh ok
@TedShifrin Why do we have $P_\bar{F}(E)=P(E)$ ?
 
Because it's the same problem, just starting one step later, @Hippa.
 
11:02 PM
Mk ok I see your point
I think I get it now
I'm really bad at probabilities :/
I have a hard time setting up the problems
 
That's exactly what your infinite series solution tells you.
 
But that one is 'intuitive'
 
@Hippa: This is the first time I've studied/learned the stuff. You're allowed to find it difficult.
 
:-)
But I have to learn all of the things in just 3/4 weeks :/
All the proba's program
 
That's nuts.
I don't know how far you're going.
You've been doing abstract math that's far harder.
 
11:04 PM
Me neither xD
 
@Twink Their condition is more general. That is, your condition implies theirs, but theirs does not imply yours
 
hi @robjohn
 
@TedShifrin Hey there. Anything new?
 
LOL, no, just trying to make it to semester's end :P
you?
 
11:05 PM
@TedShifrin just trying to get back in step after the 4-day weekend
 
@robjohn so, why $\overline{R(V-I)}=H$ implies $x=0$?
 
I'm sure you'll be fine, @robjohn :)
@Hippa: Looks like a reasonable amount. About a third of my course.
 
@TedShifrin That's what we did last week
That's the 'Colles' program
 
Oh, yeah, I just noticed that.
Maybe I lied. It's more like 1/6 of our course.
 
11:08 PM
Amuse-toi bien
 
Well that's understandable
Probas have been added this year with the ,ew programs
new
 
Looks like the evaluation system is up now... let's see if they liked me.
 
Probability is a lot more elementary than a lot of the stuff you've been doing, @Hippa.
You don't get to find out until after grades are in, @Mike.
 
@Hippalectryon There's an edit button, you know :P
 
Aw.
 
11:09 PM
@TedShifrin True, but I like more 'abstract' stuff
@teadawg1337 Too lazy :-)
 
A balance of both is good, @Hippa.
 
@Hippalectryon Fair enough, lol
 
I insist that my multivariable math students be able to compute and prove stuff.
Glad to see you didn't crash in the rain, @teadawg.
 
I love multivariable calc
 
@TedShifrin I still haven't been able to do the lake problem :-) I don't have time to watch your vids
 
11:10 PM
@TedShifrin I almost did, brakes locked up at one point
 
Scary, @teadawg
Drive slowly.
There's no answer in the vids, @Hippa.
 
@TedShifrin Well at least I need the multivar course to answer it
 
Or maybe a bit of differential geometry, too ...
 
Don't drive, @teadawg1337
 
Don't drive with him, @Mike.
He'd be scarier on snow.
 
11:12 PM
Don't plan to.
 
LOL
 
OK, I'm outta here.
 
Bye.
 
@TedShifrin later
 
Cya, Ted
I wish I were as good at driving irl as I am in videogames...
 
11:15 PM
I wish I were as good at maths irl as I am in videogames
 
@Hippalectryon You play games that simulate math problems? I need some of those
 
@teadawg1337 No need for that :-) @Chris'ssis Gives me enough weekly awesome math problems :D
 
Wow, I've been building with LEGO and K'nex my whole life and it just dawned on me to try and calculate the amount of possible permutations in putting the pieces together...
 
Well, it's infinite with K'nex due to the aspect of snapping pieces onto rods
I can't believe I've never thought of this before...
 
11:29 PM
I've never had K'nexes
 
@Hippalectryon They're pretty cool, you can build mini-rollercoasters with them and stuff
 
@teadawg1337 Try quantum k'nex, it should reduce the number of possible combinations :D
 
Wow, I'm so tired I actually googled that to see what it was. I just got the joke
 
11:49 PM
1 rep point away from 200 :D
 

« first day (1580 days earlier)      last day (3442 days later) »