« first day (2589 days earlier)      last day (2431 days later) » 

12:00 AM
Suppose $\gamma^{n-1} (a_{n-1} + a_n\gamma)$ is T. Then $p(\gamma)$ is $T + \cdots + T + T = A/T + T = A/T$
 
12:16 AM
The final step of this experiment requires this question:
0
Q: Is a linear combination of algebraic powers of a transcendental transcendental?

SecretLindlemann Weierstrass theorem showed that the set $\{e^{\alpha_n}\}$ is algebraically independent for algebraic numbers $\alpha$. i.e. $$\sum_{n}a_ne^{\alpha_n} \neq 0$$ However, while the transcendence of sums and products of arbitrary transcendentals is an open question, is the above nonzer...

actually nvm, this is not useful cause there is no reference to $\alpha, \beta$
 
@Balarka cool, did you work any problems out?
 
12:43 AM
$a_n (\alpha + \beta)^n = a_n (\alpha^n + \alpha^{n-1}\beta + \alpha^{n-2}\beta^2 + \cdots + \alpha\beta^{n-1}+\beta^n)$
Let $s=(\alpha+\beta), p=\alpha\beta$
Assume $(s,p)$ is A,T
For $n$ odd:
$a_n (\alpha + \beta)^n = a_n (\alpha^{n-1}(\alpha + \beta) + \alpha^{n-3}\beta^2 (\alpha + \beta) + \cdots \alpha\beta^{n-1}(\alpha+\beta))$
=A(TA+TA+...+TA)=A(T+T+...+T)=AT=T
For $n$ even
$a_n (\alpha + \beta)^n = a_n (\alpha^{n-1}(\alpha + \beta) + \alpha^{n-3}\beta^2 (\alpha + \beta) + \cdots \alpha\beta^{n-1}(\alpha+\beta) + \beta^n)$
=A(TA+TA+...+TA+T)=AT=T
Tidying it up...
Let $p(x)=\sum_{n=1}^ma_nx^n$
Let $s=(\alpha + \beta), k = \alpha\beta$ where $\alpha,\beta$ transcendental
Suppose $s$ is algebraic. Then $k$ is transcendental by math.stackexchange.com/questions/899097/… there exists $p$ such that $p(s)=0$ i.e.
$p(s) = \sum_{n} a_n s^n = 0$
Expanding:
$a_ns^n = a_n (\alpha^n + \alpha^{n-1}\beta + \alpha^{n-2}\beta^2 + \cdots + \alpha\beta^{n-1}+\beta^n)$
For $n$ odd:
$a_ns^n = a_n (\alpha^{n-1}(\alpha + \beta) + \alpha^{n-3}\beta^2 (\alpha + \beta) + \cdots \alpha\beta^{n-1}(\alpha+\beta))$
= A(TA+TA+...+TA)=A(T+T+...+T)=AT=T
Hence $\sum_n a_ns^n= \sum_n T = T$
but this is a contradiction since $0=A$
For $n$ even:
$a_n (\alpha + \beta)^n = a_n (\alpha^{n-1}(\alpha + \beta) + \alpha^{n-3}\beta^2 (\alpha + \beta) + \cdots \alpha\beta^{n-1}(\alpha+\beta) + \beta^n)$
=A(TA+TA+...+TA+T)=A(T+...+T)=AT=T
but this is a contradiction since $0=A$
Suppose $k$ is algebraic. Then $s$ is transcendental by math.stackexchange.com/questions/899097/…, there exists $p$ such that $p(k)=0$ i.e.
$p(s) = \sum_{n} a_n s^n = \sum_{n} a_n\alpha^k\beta^k = 0$
=$\sum_n AA^k=\sum_n A = A$
There is no contradiction
Suppose $s,k$ both transcendental. Then:
7 mins ago, by Secret
= A(TA+TA+...+TA)=A(T+T+...+T)=AT=T
Acutally, this step is wrong
= A(TA+TA+...+TA)=A(T+T+...+T)=AA=A
 
1:18 AM
Let $a,b$ be transcendental and let $s=a+b,t=ab$
Suppose $s$ is transcendental. Then $t$ is algebraic
$\forall n \in \Bbb{N},(ab)^n$ is algebraic
Base case:
$ab$ is algebraic
$(ab)^2 = (a+b)^2-a^2-b^2-ab $ is $A=T^2-T^2-T^2-A \implies A=T+T+T$
and so on by induction
Suppose $t$ is transcendental. Then $s$ is algebraic
$\forall n \in \Bbb{N}, (a+b)^n$ is algebraic
Base case:
$(a+b)$ is algebraic
$(a+b)^2 = a^2 + 2ab +b^2$ is $A=T+T+T$
 
Here's an integral challenge, mostly because I can't remember how to do it myself
Apparently, $\int_{-1}^1 (1-x^2)^p\,dx=\dfrac{\sqrt{\pi} \Gamma(p+1)}{\Gamma(p+3/2)}$ for $p>-1$. (i.e. Mathematica says this)
When $p$ is an integer, one can do this by hand (albeit tediously if $p$ is large)
But for $p$ non-integer, the only approach that comes to mind is to transform this into the beta function
and that seems a bit of a cop-out
(though it is immediate upon using symmetry and subbing $u=x^2$...oh well)
this is cute. If $p$ is a nonnegative integer, then $\int_0^1 (1-x^2)^p\,dx=\frac{(2p)!!}{(2p+1)!!}$.
 
2:02 AM
Let $a,b$ be transcedentals. Then suppose a+b is algebraic
let a+b=c algebraic. Then a-b=c-2b is transcendental
$(a+b)^2-2b^2$ is A-T is transcendental
=$a^2+2ab-b^2$ is T+A-T. Thus $a^2-b^2$ is transcendental
 
2:29 AM
Let $a,b$ be transcendentals
Suppose $(a+ib)$ is algebraic. Then a+ib=c is algebraic. Then a-ib=c-2ib is transcendental
$(a+ib)(a-ib)=a^2+b^2$ is AT thus transcendental
$a^2+b^2=(a+b)^2-2ab$ is A-T is transcendental (since $iab$ is transcendental and i is algebraic, hence $ab$ is transcendental, hence $a+b$ is algebraic)
 
2:42 AM
Does $\Bbb R^2 \setminus \{0\}$ have a Green function?
 
[Random]
$$A(x)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_nx^n$$
Let $f$ linear. Then
$$f(A(x)) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_nf(x^n)$$
Depend on $f$, different recursion relations will be produced
Suppose we want $a_nf(x^n) =(a_n-a_{n-1})x^n$. Then:
$f(x^n)=\left(1-\frac{a_{n-1}}{a_n}\right)x^n$
$x^n = f^{-1} \left(1-\frac{a_{n-1}}{a_n}x^n\right) = \left(1-\frac{a_{n-1}}{a_n}\right)f^{-1}(x^n)$
 
3:13 AM
[Old]
$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{H_n}{n}\right)^m$$
$$\sum_{n=1}^{k}\left(\frac{H_n}{n}\right)^m$$
2
 
3:25 AM
I feel like I need to ask a math question
but yet cannot find a question to ask
XD
aaaaarrgh
 
What's with the starscream?
 
@Secret frustration
lmao
"secret frustration"
my frustration is secret
 
Yesterday I asked a question on MSE about an excercise in Axler's Linear algebra done right. In the answer to the question, the answerer assumed that you can always find a basis in $V$ for which
 
ok
@AodenTeoMasaToshi what about this post?
is there a moderation issue?
 
Sorry no, I made a mistake and sent the message before I was done typing
 
This is my actual question: "Yesterday I asked a question on MSE about an excercise in Axler's Linear algebra done right. In the answer to the question, the answerer assumed that you can always find a basis in an arbitrary vector space $V$ with respect to which a basis of V* becomes a dual basis of V. I am having trouble understanding why this is so. Does anyone know why this is?"
 
What's V^* supposed to be here?
 
Nobody knows why this is
we are not mind readers, lol. XD
 
In this case it refers to the dual space of V
 
3:36 AM
(your post was phrased to ask why the answer had that statement. Can't say why.)
i don't know why that statement is true either fwiw.
someone ekse might
 
Not in my wheelhouse either, I'm afraid.
 
Okay, thanks anyway.
 
I mean, "there's a basis of V such that the corresponding basis of the dual space is a dual basis of V" is a plausible sounding statement
 
It does, but when trying to prove it I had some difficulty.
 
so bascially
@AodenTeoMasaToshi basis and dual space can be thought of as operations right?
so basically you want to ask if the dual space's basis is the dual basis of V
essentially whether the concepts commute?
no clue
never heard of a "dual space"
probably look into that
see if the basis can be commuted somehow
if you know what i mean
i don't!



 
3:42 AM
Yes. The dual space of some vector space V is simply the set of all linear functionals on V.
 
@AodenTeoMasaToshi so linear operations that are closed under V?
sounds interesting
 
The most obvious case is just column vectors vs. row vectors
 
but not really in the mood
 
column vectors would be elements of the vector space, whereas row vectors act (by multiplication on the left) to send column vectors to real numbers
so row vectors are elements of the dual (vector) space.
 
kk
 
3:44 AM
@Typhon Basically linear maps that map elements of V to elements of some scalar field F.
 
There's definitely cases that can't be just thought of as "column vectors vs row vectors", but it captures the sense in which elements of the dual space are not any stranger than elements of the vector space
 
Yes, thanks.
 
@AodenTeoMasaToshi oh
well the basis of that vector space will be the transpose of the vectors in the basis of V
 
So, for instance, if my vector space is just column vectors of length n, then a basis for that would just be the standard $\{e_i\}$ one, and the corresponding basis of the dual space would be $\{e^i\}$.
 
the reason why is because it will consist of all transposes of elements in V
and (maybe) some odd change
 
3:48 AM
@AodenTeoMasaToshi the dual of the dual space is the original vector space, that is $(V^*)^* \cong V$. So taking the dual basis of a basis in $V^*$ can thiught of as a basis in $V$
 
not into abstract linear algebra though
 
And that's a dual basis because $e^i(e_j)=\delta_{ij}$
 
i just use linear algebra for geometry and computer graphics
 
But, uh, column vectors are easy
 
so...
uuuuh
i cant comment much
@Semiclassical aside from being rectangular prisms of numbers, what are Tensors? I know that matrices generalize the idea of linear transformations. What do tensors represent?
 
3:50 AM
Well, the boring answer is that they're multidimensional arrays
 
-_-
 
a vector has elements indexed by one number. a matrix has elements by pairs of numbers.
 
no shit!
XD
i knew that
i meant algebraically
like... as a linear algebra structure
 
Not sure what you mean by that.
 
@Semiclassical matrices can be multiplied by other matrices and vectors
matrices have determinants, eigenvalues, etc.
 
3:52 AM
Ah. Tensors generalize that in a different way.
 
other than being a cube of numbers
what do tensors even mean
i keep trying to google it and find general relativity papers
and my mind cannot handle that at this time
XD
 
the way you represent matrix multiplication is as such: $A=BC\implies A_{ij}=\sum_k B_{ik}C_{kj}$
 
ok
 
with tensors, you only really worry about the second part of that
 
raises eyebrow
 
3:54 AM
So, for instance, one might run into expressions like $\sum_{j,k}A_{ijk}B_j C_{kl}$
 
:/
A is a tensor?
times a vector
 
right.
 
times a matrix?
 
Again, you don't really talk about multiplication as such.
 
oh
 
3:55 AM
because, well, multiplication acts from left-to-right
not much left-to-right about that
 
ok
 
and you'd write the output of that as, say, $D_{il}$
 
D is a matrix?
 
you wouldn't regard that as $D=ABC$, because that doesn't make clear which indices are being paired
yeah
 
ooooh
 
3:56 AM
another way to look at it which you might appreciate
 
so the issue is that multiplication by a cube of numbers is vague?
 
one way to think about matrix multiplication is in a sort of network flow picture...quick doodle
 
"network flow picture"
ok now you got me intrigued
 
not good words
but i can't think of anything better
 
actually
fine words
 
3:58 AM
well, it'll be better words for describing the tensorial case
for the matrix case it's pretty boring :/
 
kdl.cs.umass.edu/papers/jensen-et-al-infocom2006.pdf this has a formula heavily similar to the determinant AND it performed the strongest when I was testing different protocols.
so needless to say when you said "network flow", that perked my interest
 
ah
this is probably not in that direction, alas.
 
unless you meant a continuous network
 

« first day (2589 days earlier)      last day (2431 days later) »