« first day (2543 days earlier)      last day (2485 days later) » 

That's great, Danu.
 
Congrats @Danu!
 
Bernd Siebert, maybe? He does mirror symmetry/complex geometry stuff
 
Also hey everyone!
 
I'll be working with professor Cortés mostly, I think.
Though I also think you're supposed to have 2 supervisors or something, I don't know.
 
9:01 PM
Hi Demonark
 
@Te
 
I'll be funded through this grant.
 
@TedShifrin what is the flaw in my logic ?
 
Well, lots left to learn, Danu. Very exciting.
I wrote down the problem, @Maks. It holds for all $x$ and $y$.
So how can $ax+by-cx+dx =y$ hold for all $x,y$?
 
@TedShifrin Yeah. Now I just gotta rush to finish my thesis :P
 
9:02 PM
How's it going?
 
Well, that's good, too, @Danu.
 
Yeah, I get it now
 
Are you finishing a Masters @Danu?
 
I have to think a different aproach then
 
No, @Maks. Answer my question. :)
 
9:03 PM
@PVAL-inactive yeah, I'm done with everything but writing up my thesis work. I have plenty of course credits :)
 
Whats your title?
 
(I'm doing my thesis in LMU Munich, with Kotschick)
 
I wonder if @Danu wishes he were still doing physics :P
 
Of the thesis? Ehh... Something like "Complex geometry and Chern numbers of $G_2$ flag manifolds"?
 
sounds important.
 
9:04 PM
So you gave a decent talk, @Danu?
 
Do you mean for which values of $a,b,c,d$ the equation has sense ?
 
My main results are calculations for Chern numbers of invariant almost complex structures on some $G_2$ homogeneous spaces (flag manifolds) + a uniqueness result for Kaehler structure on a certain manifold @PVAL
 
I'm sorry, my english got a bit rusty D:
 
@Maks: I mean that you should be able to tell me equations about $a,b,c,d$.
 
So well have this S^6 business settled soon I guess.
 
9:05 PM
@TedShifrin I think they were very happy with the talk. All the PhD students told me it was obvious I could get the position afterwards, which made me feel really good about it. The only time they stopped was to ask whether that rigidity result is "mine" or not :D
 
Oh, what have you heard, @PVAL?
That's great, @Danu. I think you've learned a lot.
 
@PVAL-inactive I found that a complex structure on $S^6$ yields two non-standard complex structures on the quadric in $\Bbb CP^6$
(this was definitely already known to Robert Bryant)
(but I don't think anyone ever wrote it down)
 
@Ted That was supposed to be a mild joke.
 
Oh, ok.
Robert knows most everything :P
 
I know studying G_2 invariant structures was like Chern's idea in trying to kill that problem though.
 
9:07 PM
Right. But Robert didn't see how to push it through.
 
Right... I didn't really focus on $S^6$.
 
$ax - cx + dx = 0$ and $by = y$ that's what you mean ?
 
So how can that hold for all $x,y$, @Maks?
 
I just use the fact that one of my spaces fibers over $S^6=G_2/SU(3)$ since it is $G_2/U(2)$ where the $U(2)$ sits inside $SU(3)$.
And the $G_2/U(2)$ is diffeomorphic to the quadric in $\Bbb CP^6$, but also to $\Bbb P(TS^6)\cong \Bbb P(T^*S^6)$.
 
Can you show these structures aren't Kahler?
 
9:09 PM
well , $b = 1$ and $a - c + d = 1$
 
They cannot be, since they differ from the standard strcuture and that's the unique Kaehler structure.
The fact that they differ is proven in my thesis via Chern numbers. The uniqueness result is due to Brieskorn (in his thesis).
 
I didn't know we knew that.
 
Close, @Maks.
 
The statement is $X$ homeo to $Q$ and Kaehler $\implies$ $X$ biholomorphic to $Q$ @PVAL.
 
@Danu: When you finish, please send me a .pdf of your thesis :)
 
9:10 PM
The rigidity result in my thesis is the exact same statement for another manifold (again of the form $G_2/U(2)$ but it's a different $U(2)$ subgroup)
 
Aren't there lots of 1-parameter families of Kahler surfaces which are homeomorphic but not diffeomorphic?
 
Surfaces, yes
Right
I should've said dim>2
 
Hmm, really? I know about families that are diffeo with diff complex structures ... What's an example, PVAL?
 
The Hirzebruch surfaces are the only things that mess it up
 
Why are they not diffeo?
 
9:11 PM
Yeah, wait I'm not sure about that exact claim.
I just know that this Brieskorn result fails in dim 2 because of the Hirzebruch surfaces.
 
I'm not sure I know this.
 
Ups, dont know where that one came from
$a - c + d = 0$
 
I also don't know this claim of PVAL's.
 
Right, OK, @Maks. And the other equation gives you what?
 
But it sounded familiar/close to something I did know so I just started talking anyways ;)
 
9:12 PM
Typical @Danu :D
 
Indeed
 
@PVAL I assume you mean Stein structures on R^4 or something.
 
Heya @MikeM. I'm confuzled about names.
 
Go on?
 
I thought there were examples of closed Kahler surfaces which were deformation equivalent which were known to not be isomorphic.
 
9:13 PM
I met two young people today. One just finished first year at Princeton; the other was your UCLA friend.
 
$ b + c + d = 0$
$ ax = x$
Then $b = 1, a = 1, c = 0$ and $d = -1$
 
Name @ Princeton?
 
OK, @Maks. I'll trust you.
 
and that these were the first examples plugged in to Donaldson's and Freedman's machinery.
 
@MikeM: He never actually told me, but I assumed he was Justin or Dustin ... :)
 
9:15 PM
@PVAL-inactive I think I misread what you said. Deformation equivalent things are diffeomorphic.
The non-diffeomorphic things are not deformation equivwlnt
 
Yeah, I don't know examples of homeo but not diffeo ... in the complex world.
 
Thanks @TedShifrin :D
 
@PVAL-inactive Are you talking about these? These are diffeo but not isomorphic as complex manifolds
 
Anyhow, @MikeM: I didn't know you know the Princeton guy, too.
You're welcome, @Maks :)
 
Dustin is the UCLA guy. I thought you were saying I knew the Princeton guy.
@Ted Many examples in 4-manifold land just not deformations of one another.
 
9:18 PM
Oh, no, I told you I was confuzled. I thought UCLA guy had a different name (Deven)? He told me he'd chatted with me on MSE, but didn't tell me his name here.
Yeah, all the families I know from deformation theory are obviously about deformations, @MikeM.
 
There was a Dustin at UCLA who is my friend. Deven was from UCLA and is my boss.
 
Oh, I didn't know you were doing AoPS now.
Now I'm totally confuzled.
 
I've done an online class with them for a year.
 
I can't find the examples I was looking for.
 
Very cool. I hadn't known that.
 
9:22 PM
The family I had in mind might not be deformation equivalent I guess.
I'm pretty certain that many of the first examples of exotic closed 4-manifolds were Kahler things that were distinguished by Kahler means.
So they were obvious things to try.
 
I wish we had done formal introductions. I must have met Dustin, then. And the Princeton guy knew me from the videos (he had Gunning — 85 years old, he said — for the Honors analysis course).
I don't know that stuff, @PVAL.
 
Well the Dolgachev surface is certainly Kahler
and I guess that was the first example I can find, but I guess that isn't def. equiv. to E(1) either.
 
@PVAL What you're saying now is correct. It's supposed to be elementary that deformations are diffoemorphic I think.
 
That's the theorem you all learned for your qualifying exam, @MikeM. :)
 
@Ted enlighten me.
 
9:33 PM
I thought that's essentially the content of Ehresmann's Theorem for proper submersions.
 
Oh.
 
Yeah I guess that works.
You can double the cobordism and work over base S^1 if you want to be pedantic and just use the compact version.
 
Meh.
 
 
1 hour later…
10:40 PM
Hey @Alessandro!
Done with exams?
 
10:52 PM
hi @dami
I'll have one in September, but apart from that I'm free now
 
Woohoo
 
11:06 PM
@Alessandro check our chat
Hey @Semi
 
hey-o
 
How's it going?
 
@AkivaWeinberger cool. Sounds good.
@AkivaWeinberger im more busy now. Looking into modular arithmetic as it relates to quadratic rings. In particular I am looking at the modular arithmetic of these rings.
I think some properties might be useful in that.
 
reminds me. one of the pieces of number theory / modular arithmetic I never learned about is quadratic reciprocity
at some point i should read up a little on that just for my own edification
 
oh my god
the law of quadratic reciprocity was something that the professor handwaved on the very last day to reveal which primes were and were not equal to norms of certain elements
Maybe I'll stumble onto that.
 
11:17 PM
Neat.
I know that's a highlight of classical elementary number theory, but not much more than that.
 
hmm
I've been doing it all on my own.
 
yeah.
 
In fact, I have a library of minecraft books I've been sharing with the server.
I decided to play it for a bit this week and well... books. XD
 
My main knowledge of modular arithmetic is from personal reading and from a one-semester abstract algebra course.
 
Oh. I know of normal modular arithmetic.
 
11:19 PM
But the latter doesn't really get near to quadratic reciprocity.
 
I'm talking about things like $a \equiv b (mod \sqrt{3})$
interestingly enough
 
um what
 
facepalm
 
?
 
11:21 PM
how did I copy-paste that
 
the link goes back to this room
 
In number theory, the law of quadratic reciprocity is a theorem about modular arithmetic that gives conditions for the solvability of quadratic equations modulo prime numbers. There are a number of equivalent statements of the theorem. One version of the law states that for p and q odd prime numbers, ( p q ) ( q p ) = ( − 1...
 
Do you mean, recursion?
 
hmmm
@Daminark yes, and it forms a mathematical ring.
@Semiclassical interesting. The integers which are norms of elements in Z[sqrt{3}] are the values such that the legendre symbol of (k/3) = 0 or 1.
interesting
very interesting
wait no
only the 1's are guarunteed.
actually nevermind
this only corresponds to ones such that |k| = |N(x)|
 
"The early proofs of quadratic reciprocity are relatively unilluminating. The situation changed when Gauss used Gauss sums to show that quadratic fields are subfields of cyclotomic fields, and implicitly deduced quadratic reciprocity from a reciprocity theorem for cyclotomic fields."
I don't really understand that, but it sounds neat.
 

« first day (2543 days earlier)      last day (2485 days later) »