« first day (3361 days earlier)      last day (1653 days later) » 

11:00 PM
or x = i
so Z[x] become Z[i] and x^2+1 becomes 0
 
that's the idea yeah. If you want to make this rigorous, you need the homomorphism theorem
 
in a certain sense that is what Z[i] means
 
in finding a homomorphism
I struggle sometimes to find the image
 
Can someone please explain the "base" in a logarithm
 
I can work this out
 
11:02 PM
@Will $\log_b y$ is the answer to "what is $x$ such that $b^x = y$?"
$b$ is the base because it's the base of the exponent $b^x$
so e.g. $3^2 = 9$, so $2$ is $x$ such that $3^x = 9$, so $\log_3 9 = 2$
oh the what
and that generalizes to tensor product?
 
wait, is that right? hmm, no I should be more careful
We have $k[G \times H]=k[G] \otimes_k k[H]$. To give a $A \otimes_R B$-module for two $R$-algebras $A$ and $B$ is the same as giving a $R$-module $M$ and two ring homomorphisms $A,B \to \mathrm{End}_R(M)$ whose images commute pointwise. I don't know of a concise categorical description for this
 
@MatheinBoulomenos am sorry but, how did you choose x^2+1 , and how did you know that that is what we need for ideal to make it work out , to be isomprhic to Z[i] ?
 
@Jacksoja well, can you think of a surjective ring homomorphism Z[x]->Z
@LeakyNun at least you can say that $k[G * H]$ is a pullback of categories, lol
 
@MatheinBoulomenos evaluation at zero works right?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos oh btw a pset had me prove that there are only finitely many extensions of Qp of degree n
 
11:13 PM
@Jacksoja oops
 
there were like 5 subquestions as guide
and then the next question had me show that there are infinitely many extensions of Fp((x)) of degree p
and then the next question had me pinpoint why the proof fails for Fp((x))
 
@LeakyNun didn't I already tell you that you reduce it to Kummer theory?
 
I was staring at it for a long time
and then I was so excited when I finally discovered it
 
@Jacksoja I meant a surjective homomorphism Z[x]->Z[i]
 
@MatheinBoulomenos okay let me see
 
11:14 PM
I even worked out the Artin--Schreier extensions of F2((x))
and found that the corresponding Eisenstein polynomials are y^2 - t^k y - t = 0
which converges to y^2 - t = 0 !
 
y^2 - t = 1?
 
I already included a space -,-
 
hehehehehe
 
@LeakyNun there are some substeps, but it does't seem that hard.
1. Reduce to the case that the base field has sufficient roots of unity
2. Reduce to the Galois case
3. Use the fact that local Galois groups are solvalble, reducing it to the cyclic case
4. Kummer theory
5. profit
 
@Mathein you forgot the intermediate step "???????????"
 
11:17 PM
but I gave all the relevant steps
 
@MatheinBoulomenos then for this proof the Fp((t)) fails at step 1 :P
 
@LeakyNun I think the precise relationship between k[GxH] and k[G] and k[H] likely involved 2-category theory. It's probably a 2-limit of categories or something
but I'm not sure about the details
 
oh no
cries in infinity category
 
the reason is that the universal property of GxH that is relevant here is not that of a product. the UMP of products is completely useless here since we are interested in morphisms out of GxH. But luckily GxH has another universal property: it's a 2-colimit! (This holds for general semidirect products)
 
11:21 PM
maybe inflation restriction will help
or not
 
rather not
 
but I like inflation restriction
 
so do I
 
what is Galois representation?
 
a representation of a Galois group
But in elementary terms the universal property of GxH as a 2-colimit is just $\mathrm{Hom}_{Grp}(G\times H,K) = \{(\phi,\psi) \in \mathrm{Hom}_{Grp}(G,K) \times \mathrm{Hom}_{Grp}(H,K) \mid \forall g \in G, h \in H: [\phi(g),\psi(h)]=1\}$. That's totally reasonable, despite the scary-sounding description "2-colimit"
 
11:25 PM
what are some interesting theorems / definitions?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos is it evaluation at i ?
 
@Jacksoja precies
 
@Jacksoja yes
@LeakyNun oh boy
 
What I fail to see is how from Z[i
 
@MatheinBoulomenos what on earth is that
 
11:26 PM
you jumped to Z x
 
Z[x] must not be viewed as just any old ring @Jacksoja
how it interacts with other objects is what makes it interesting
(ok it is also interesting as a ring unto itself)
 
okay intresting
and if we want to show that this map is surjective
 
for any ring $A$, any $x \in A$ gives us an evaluation homomorphism $ev_x: \Bbb Z[x] \to A$
 
if I pick an element as a+bi in Z[x]
what is the polynomial that when evaluates at i gives a+bi
 
@LeakyNun there's a plethora of interesting and difficult theorems on Galois representations. But maybe a more reasonable question for the beginning is how do you get a Galois representation? If you want a representation of, say the absolute Galois group of $\Bbb Q$, it's not exactly straightforward to just "write down" a representation since $\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{\Bbb Q}/\Bbb Q)$ is pretty hard
 
11:29 PM
well you reduce it to a finite extension because it has finite image anyway
 
if you want Artin representation sure
but a continuous representation to $\mathrm{GL}_n(\Bbb Q_p)$ won't necessarily have finite image
 
oh no
what do we do then
 
ok I see how it is surjective
 
well, there are a lot of objects that actually give rise to a Galois representation. One of the easiest example is the Tate module of an abelian variety
 
wow
 
11:33 PM
@MatheinBoulomenos so the strategy is to construct a surjective ring hom in such questions?
going back to my problem
 
@Jacksoja yes, then compute the kernel
 
Z[i] / (2+i)
I want to find a surjective hom from Z[x] to Z[i]
with kernel (2+i)
 
hey
anyone willing to give a hint for this:
 
@LeakyNun so if you have an abelian variety (e.g. an elliptic curve) $A$ over $\Bbb Q$, then $A(\overline{\Bbb Q})$ is an abelian group. This consists of the closed points that are cut out in some projective space by homogenous polynomials equations with coefficients in $\Bbb Q$ and the group operation is also given by polynomials with coefficients in $\Bbb Q$. This meas that $G_{\Bbb Q}$ acts on $A(\overline{\Bbb Q})$ and the action is compatible with the group operation
 
Hey, can anyone tell me; If i have a field homomorphism acting between two Q-subspaces over C can I automatically assume that it is a Q-linear map or is scalar multiplication not guaranteed?
 
11:36 PM
lol sorry that was wrong
 
@MrCauchy it's automatically $\Bbb Q$-linear
 
@MrCauchy any field homomorphism must preserve Q (why?)
also "field homomorphism between two Q-subspaces over C" doesn't really make sense because subspaces don't need to be fields
 
so i originally had two subfields with a field homomorphism, i have shown they are Q-subspaces. I want to show the the image of the homomorphism restricted to Q is exactly Q itself, i figured that if i could show it was a linear map then f(q) = qf(1) for any q in Q
 
@MatheinBoulomenos then we take out the p-torsion part and make it Z_(p)?
@MrCauchy that makes the approach circular :P
 
So what you can do now is fix some prime $p$. Then for all $n$, look at the $p^n$-torsion. $A(\overline{\Bbb Q})[p^n]$. This is a finite abelian group, which is also a module over $\Bbb Z/p^n \Bbb Z$. Now take the inverse limit $\varprojlim A(\overline{\Bbb Q})[p^n]$, this will be a module over $\Bbb Z_p$.
The transition maps are equivariant with respect to the action of the Galois group (they are just given by multiplication with some suitable power of $p$, i.e. adding an element to itself a bunch of times), so $G_{\Bbb Q}$ acts on this inverse limit
 
11:40 PM
@MatheinBoulomenos if the kernel is 2+i , what will the map be in this case?
 
@LeakyNun that is what i feared, wrong approach then?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos am sorry but am failing to see this, i want to understand it before i go to bed
 
now we can take the tensor product $\Bbb Q_p \otimes_{\Bbb Z_p} \varprojlim A(\overline{\Bbb Q})[p^n]$ and voilà, there's a $p$-adic Galois representation
 
@MrCauchy show that f(q) = q for any q in Q using the fact that f is a field homomorphism
@MatheinBoulomenos cool
and how do I know it isn't 0?
@Jacksoja maybe you should follow Ted's approach
 
@LeakyNun I like this aproch of finding a map better, but I dont understand it compeltely
seems if we already know a surjective map and all
we already know too much
 
11:43 PM
@LeakyNun we know pretty well what these torsion points look like. $A(\overline{\Bbb Q}[p^n]) \cong (\Bbb Z/p^n\Bbb Z)^{2d}$ where $d$ is the dimension of $A$
but the Galois action is more mysterious
 
hmm
 
so the inverse limit will be $\Bbb Z_p^{2d}$
 
so 5 is in (2+i)
Since intesection of ideals is an ideal
Z intersect (2+i) can either be Z or 5Z
@MatheinBoulomenos @LeakyNun does this make sense?
 
yes
I want to sleep now
should I tell you an algebraic solution before I go?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos okay good night and thanks!
If you have time yes id love to
 
11:48 PM
@Jacksoja Z[i]/(2+i)=Z[x]/(x^2+1,2+x)=Z[x]/(2+x,5)=Z/5
 
I will solve other problems
 
that's really short
 
@Jacksoja and you should really work out the elementary approach Ted gave
namely draw out the lattice
 
okay thanks ! I will try to work on these until tomorrow
that was very fast
No idea how I would come up with such solution
 
11:55 PM
When switching bounds on a definite integral, one puts a minus sign in front of the integral. However, the same would be achieved by switching bounds and then putting a minus sign on the new upper limit, correct?
 
"We are sad to have learnt from my father the #mathematician Jean-Pierre Serre that his #American friend, the mathematician John Tate, Abel #prize winner, professor emeritus at Harvard, has passed away"
@MatheinBoulomenos
 
@LeakyNun yeah I heard this
it's quite sad
 
rip
 

« first day (3361 days earlier)      last day (1653 days later) »