« first day (3274 days earlier)      last day (1730 days later) » 
01:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

3:00 PM
@AlessandroCodenotti Think of a 2x2 matrix integer matrix of determinant 1 whose eigenvalues are irrational. Then, being a matrix from $\text{SL}_2(\Bbb Z)$, it acts on $\Bbb R^2$ and keeps a pair of transverse foliations on $\Bbb R^2$ by irrational slope lines fixed. This descends to a pair of transverse foliations on $T^2$ by real lines which are being fixed by the matrix
Along one, it expands, and along another, it contracts.
 
@AlessandroCodenotti
oops
look at the Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplacian over relatively compact subsets of $\tilde M$ and then take the infimum over all of them
 
This is an example of an Anosov diffeomorphism of $T^2$.
 
$\tilde M$ is the Riemannian universal covering space of $M$
 
A pseudo-Anosov diffeomorphism of a surface is something which keeps a pair of transverse singular foliations on the surface fixed. I think there are associated measures to the foliations in the transverse direction, and you demand you stretch one foliation by $\lambda$ and another by $1/\lambda$.
 
$\lambda_0$ is called the "fundamental tone" because it's the lowest frequency if you view $\tilde M$ as a big drum
 
3:03 PM
this is bottom of the spectrum?
 
lmao I forgot to say $\lambda_0(\tilde M)>0$
that's the theorem
@BalarkaSen it's inf spec ($-\Delta$) but isn't necessarily attained unless it's zero
 
@BalarkaSen Ahh, right. It was in connection to this qgm.au.dk/video/mc/weil-petersson that I heard about them
 
i see
 
now I believe that this shows that hyperbolic groups are amenable
 
@ÍgjøgnumMeg which courses are you gonna take? I guess ANT and modular forms are set
 
3:04 PM
by hyperbolic groups I mean those that give compact quotients of H^n
$\lambda_0(\Bbb H^n)=\frac{1}{4}$ IIRC
 
@Mathein right, and I'm thinking of either taking diff top 1 or taking the seminar Quadratic Forms
 
Hyperbolic groups are literally non-amenable though
 
or both, though I don't wanna overload myself in the first semester lol
 
They contains $F_2$
 
@Mathein I think diff top 1 would be good to get used to some topology, since I've never really done any lol
 
3:07 PM
@ÍgjøgnumMeg did you see that diff top 1 overlaps with modular forms?
 
That's a "paradoxical group", which is what non-amenability is, IIRC (Right, @Alessandro?)
 
ok Balarka I'm retarded
I'm deleting my account
 
@Mathein oh really
 
jesus christ
 
Ah dienstags
 
3:07 PM
the theorem is $\lambda_0(\tilde M)=0$
 
oder donnerstags
 
so this proves they're not amenable
 
Ah OK
 
@BalarkaSen yes
 
I am definitely right about the 1/4 at least in dimension 3
 
3:08 PM
I should maybe correct my statement. Hyperbolic groups which aren't two-ended (virtually $\Bbb Z$) are non-amenable
 
Could do geometric analysis lol
 
Heidelberg has a geometric analyst?
 
@BalarkaSen two ended
 
Jan Swoboda
 
@Alessandro lol whoops
corrected the correction
 
3:09 PM
he does very...European geometric analysis
 
@TobiasKildetoft I have heard of the Weil-Petersson metric but dunno what it is exactly
 
ah diff geo 1 is a requirement tho
 
@ÍgjøgnumMeg do you know what the course is about
 
@BalarkaSen Same here (even though I attended most of that master class :) )
 
looking at what this guy does, it could be completely orthogonal to what people are doing in the states
 
3:11 PM
@RyanUnger I'm curious about what that means
 
@Ryan differential operators on riemannian manifolds
I guess
 
@ÍgjøgnumMeg you could take functional analysis 2. Have you had an intro functional analysis course in your undergrad?
 
from the description
@Mathein yeah I have
 
functional analysis 2 counts as applied, lol
 
3:12 PM
"applied" by Heidelberg standards
 
there's gonna be a certain amount of catch up required by me anyway, since my undergrad was so poor
 
@AlessandroCodenotti if you look at his papers, half of them are gauge theory
few geometric analysts do gauge theory here, or at least they don't call themselves geometric analysts
 
@Mathein I could just take a seminar and 2 lectures lol
 
@RyanUnger I see
What's in functional analysis 2?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos I'm going to take that Hodge-Arakelov theory course
going in with no background
wish me luck
 
3:16 PM
lol
 
>what's a scheme
 
@Ryan good luck! I'm praying for you
 
@RyanUnger A thing that locally looks like an affine scheme
 
(I'm not even joking that's the usual definition)
 
3:16 PM
I actually know what a scheme is
but not more than that
 
@AlessandroCodenotti With an affine scheme being a type of functor of course
 
> Description
For a smooth and projective variety X over a global field of dimension n with an adelic polarization, we propose canonical local and global height pairings for two cycles Y, Z of pure dimension p, q satisfying p + q = n*1. We give some explicit arichmedean local pairings by writing down explicit formula for the diagonal green current for some Shimura varieties.
 
(and a scheme as well)
 
this is the only number theory course offered
that means it has to be accessible right
 
diagonal green current eh
 
3:19 PM
the definition of a Shimura variety is quite ... technical
 
actually if I have time to take a meme course it will be homological algebra
 
19 hours ago, by Balarka Sen
I never understood this obscene fascination with injective resolutions
@MatheinBoulomenos do you have anything to say about this?
:P
 
u pullin mathein on me eh
im sure he'll have some functorial reason to debunk me
 
Well, if you have no projective objects, then injective resolutions are hard to avoid
 
@Tobias I work with $\Bbb Z\mathsf{-Mod}$
 
3:21 PM
@BalarkaSen Well stop that
 
I work with $(\Bbb Z\mathsf{-Mod})(X)$
 
What if you don't have enough injectives
but enough projectives
 
You want $\mathbb{Z}$-comod
 
3:22 PM
If you have no projective objects then you're working in the wrong category, simple as that
 
What exactly goes wrong with that definition of abelian category
WHY INJECTIVE
 
it's just a cofibrant resolution for the standard model category structure on the category of chain complexes over an abelian category
 
oh right, of course
 
Well yeah I do fibrant resolutions
 
I have a differential geometry question, anyone that might be able to answer that here?
 
3:24 PM
@AlessandroCodenotti There are some pretty important categories that have no projective objects. Such as those of rational representations of algebraic groups (at least, the category will be either pretty boring or have no projectives)
where "pretty boring" is of course due to my own warped tastes
 
@Balarka enough injectives is more common than enough projectives. For example, all Grothendieck categories have enough injectives and for examples all category of sheaves of modules are Grothendieck categories
 
The only resolution of sheaves I had ever taken were acyclic
Which is good enough for me to take derived functors with :)
 
even if you don't use injectives object for computation, it's nice to have them for proofs. How do you get your derived functor to act on morphisms? Injective resolutions have the nice lifting property which makes this work, which general acyclic resolutions lack
 
And it's a fact that every sheaf on a topological space admits an acyclic resolution, the Godement resolution. I don't have to appeal to your Grothendieck disease!!
 
3:32 PM
Wtf are you people talking about
 
@MatheinBoulomenos That's true.
@loch @Mathein I heard y'all define $BG$ as $pt/G$ for a group scheme $G$ lol
What the hell does that mean
Insider information tells me it's a stack
 
I mostly just think of it as some 'thing' where if I want to give a map from S to BG, it's the same as giving a principal G bundle on S (as in topology)
 
and in general if you have [X/G], then a map from S to [X/G] is the same as a principal G-bundle P on S, with a G-equivariant map P to X
 
Gotcha. That makes perfect sense.
 
3:47 PM
oh no
that's just cheating
 
If $G$ acts freely on $X$, then $[X/G]$ should be realizable as a scheme, yes?
 
you need to be more careful i think - see mathoverflow.net/questions/1558/…
 
oh dear
 
"In general, the quotient of a scheme by a free action of a group is an algebraic space."
 
lol aren't those like
sheaves on the category of schemes
 
3:54 PM
yeah
well
so are schemes :p
 
lol
so representable algebraic spaces are schemes
i feel like algebraic geometry is just a big meme
its just really hard to get into the meme
 
that's what i think about homotopy theory
lmao
 
lolol
 
but i guess it's true for AG as well
so BG is the classifying space of principal G-bundles - in particular you have a universal family given by pt-> G

dim(pt) = 0, so dim(BG) = -dim(G)
(it's negative)
 
What
 
4:08 PM
lmao
 
yeah it's just a big meme
 
I don’t think geometric analysis has many memes. Feels bad
Maximum principle and integration tricks and you’re good to go
 
4:25 PM
Here’s another meme - gromov witten theory is a curve counting theory. Youre supposed to count the number of curves in some space.
you can get fractional/negative answers
 
@loch do you have any examples?
 
in the context of GW theory - i dont know an example with negative answer off the top of my head

but actually it only looks like a meme because i phrased it for clickbait. negative answers show up fairly naturally in topology because you are meant to count things with a sign
 
Boo
 
4:41 PM
fraction numbers sounds like rational divisors
 
5:05 PM
Hi hot cats
 
5:18 PM
I have a question
 
Nice question.
 
Just ask, don't ask to ask, that's how the chat works if you're new here
 
Suppose $E$ and $E'$ are fiber bundles (with fiber space $F$ and $F'$ respectively) over $B$, and there is a map $f : E \to E'$ which commutes with the bundle projections.
lol
I can speak of this as a collection $\{f_x : F \to F' \}_{x \in B}$. This is not a continuous family of collections - that's the right thing to say when both are trivial bundles! It's locally continuous, and satisfies some cocycle conditions
Would that be correct?
 
5:33 PM
I'd like to say this would be a section of a $\text{Map}(F, F')$-bundle over $B$, maybe. But that sounds really annoying!
 
So $\pi\colon E\to B$ and $\pi'\colon E'\to B$, with $f\colon E\to E'$ such that $f\circ \pi = \pi'\circ f$.
 
Right, $f$ is fiber-preserving
 
And then the $f_x$ is just restriction to the fibres at $x$?
 
@AlessandroCodenotti b... but he isn't new h... here
@BalarkaSen are bundles like sheaves?
 
5:42 PM
They are more like manifolds, I would say.
@LeakyNun are you familiar with covering spaces?
 
oh the sections form a sheaf
a bit
 
A covering space is a fibre bundle with discrete fibres.
 
@LeakyNun In a sense, yes.
 
I see
 
Covering spaces are locally constant sheaves
 
5:43 PM
cool
and locally constant sheaves are covering spaces...
 
hey guys someone could help me trying to find values $A$ and $B$, for this question math.stackexchange.com/questions/3300566/…
 
The correct analogue of that is that locally free sheaves correspond to vector bundles.
 
@BalarkaSen what do you mean by "locally continuous"?
 
@BalarkaSen how many separation axioms do you need if you want $\varinjlim\limits_{U \ni p} U = \{p\}$
@anakhro read it again
 
@LeakyNun I am referencing what he said way above.
 
5:45 PM
@LeakyNun $T_1$ I think
 
@BalarkaSen here.
 
oh
@MatheinBoulomenos is limit just intersection
 
@anakhro Since the bundles are locally trivial, that means over a chart $U$ that trivializes both bundles, I can say $\{f_x\}_{x \in U}$ is a continuous family
 
yeah of course it is
 
but don't you mean $\varprojlim$ instead of $\varinjlim$?
 
5:46 PM
perhaps
 
colimit would be a union here
 
@BalarkaSen that makes sense. Though "locally continuous" sounds like a weird name for it.
 
I guess, I didn't have a better terminology for it.
 
@BalarkaSen Yea I guess. Since each bundle has its corresponding cocycle conditions you can get cocycle conditions since it commutes with bundle projections.
 
That's my thought.
 
6:00 PM
continuous when indexed by trivializing charts , maybe
a worse one would be "trivially continuous". :P
 
Lol
 
hey guys someone could help me trying to find values $A$ and $B$, for this question https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3300566/how-to-find-the-values-of-some-constants-of-a-transformed-function?noredirect=1#comment6790335_3300566
 
@AlekMurt most people here can only help someone upon the 3rd time they ask.
 
 
1 hour later…
7:29 PM
@BalarkaSen hah, "conformorphism" = conformal diffeomorphism
that's a new one
 
8:30 PM
So the "picture-hanging puzzle" asks how to hang a picture on a wall using string and two nails, such that if either nail is removed, the picture falls.
66
Q: Hanging a picture on the wall using two nails in such a way that removing any nail makes the picture fall down

Anonymous - a groupA friend of mine told me that it's possible to hang a picture on the wall from a string using two nails in such a way that removing either of the two nails will make both the string and picture fall down. My friend also told me that I need to be acquainted with the concept of fundamental groups t...

 
Hello!
 
There aren't very many obvious practical applications of this.
Hey there!
But I did think of a potential application, although probably not a practical one.
I'm a student glider pilot. A glider is essentially a small airplane with no engine. The way you get a glider up into the air in the first place is by towing it behind an airplane.
One of the hazards of this is that the tow rope may fail to release.
So, while I was at the gliderport the other day, I had a thought: you could have two separate release mechanisms, and thread the rope through them in such a way that the rope will be released if either mechanism is activated.
I'm sure that wouldn't actually be practical, but I thought it was an interesting application of a seemingly useless discovery.
 
Suppose we have a binary relation $R$ defined in $A\times A$. And we have a formula that defines this relation. My question is, in which set is defined the result of the expression (formula)?
Suppose that the relation is $R$ defined on $\Bbb{N}\times\Bbb{N}$, where $(a,b)R(c,d)$ if and only if $2(a-c)=d-b$. In which set is defined $2(a-c)=d-b$?
I think this question has no sense, but I am not sure
 
If I understand you're right, you're looking for the set of truth values, which is $\mathbf{2} = \{T, F\}$.
Or maybe I'm not understanding you.
 
@TannerSwett thanks for the answer! I do not understand your notation, so I cannot tell you if you understand me or not
 
8:39 PM
Well, the name of the set is $\mathbf{2}$ (or just 2), and the set is the set with two elements, $T$ and $F$.
$T$ for "true" and $F$ for "false".
 
@TannerSwett but why "2" as the name of the set?
 
Just because it has 2 elements.
It's common to use "0" as the name of a set with 0 elements, "3" as the name of a set with 3 elements, and so on.
 
@TannerSwett oh, ok. Perhaps you are right
 
@manooooh in this case, the integers $\Bbb Z$, but you can't answer it abstractly as you posed it, it will depend on the formula
I think you're asking because $a-c$ and $d-b$ are not in $\Bbb N$, right?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos thanks! Suppose that the formula is given like the example. Yes, I think you are right with the integers set
@MatheinBoulomenos no, that's why I think you are right about integers. But a relation is a set, and we could replace $R$ by all the (infinite) pairs of numbers that verify the formula
 
8:44 PM
I think it should be clear from context in which set the formula is defined and it shouldn't make a difference. In the example, you could also say that we interpret the formula in $\Bbb Q$ or $\Bbb R$ or $\Bbb C$ or even quaternions $\Bbb H$
 
@MatheinBoulomenos sorry but I am asking using this particular relation. It "takes" 4 natural numbers, and what returns? That's my question
 
@manooooh that's true, but we only care for which natural numbers $a,b,c,d$ we have $2(a-c)=d-b$, so even if we use $\Bbb Z$ (or something else) to define the subset of $\Bbb N\times \Bbb N \times \Bbb N \times \Bbb N$
@manooooh ah, if you want to think of it as a function of four variables, then you can think of it as returning a truth value, either true ($T$) or false ($F$), as @TannerSwett mentioned
 
@MatheinBoulomenos but $\Bbb Z\not\subseteq\Bbb N\times \Bbb N$, $\Bbb Z\not\subseteq\Bbb Z\times \Bbb Z$ etc.
@MatheinBoulomenos yeah, probably! Ok, so let's define $f(a,b,c,d)=2(a-c)-d-b$. Now what?
 
yes, that's right. Maybe I haven't been clear enough. The idea is this: the relation $R$ is a subset of $(\Bbb N\times \Bbb N) \times (\Bbb N \times \Bbb N)$, consisting of all $((a,b),(c,d)) \in (\Bbb N\times \Bbb N) \times (\Bbb N \times \Bbb N)$ such that $2(a-c)=d-b$. This means that all elements in the relation $R$ are pairs of (pairs of) natural numbers. We only need the integers to understand _which_ pairs of natural numbers are in relation to other pairs of natural numbers.
But it's still a relation only on pairs of natural numbers
 
Hm, I think we are not going in a proper way... What happens if we have a relation $S$ on $\Bbb Z$ defined by $aSb\iff a\leq b$? We can't define a function since $\leq$ is not an equal sign :S
 
8:52 PM
@manooooh but that's a fine relation. Why do you think that we need an equal sign in the definition?
you can also rephrase $a \leq b$ as $\exists c \in \Bbb Z:a+c=b$, if you absolutely want an equal sign
 
Heyo chat
I am thinking about this
I have 2 by 2 matrix A which has expressions consisting of three parameters
 
@MatheinBoulomenos I could understood all of the first part of your message, thanks!! And yes, since we have for example 2(2-3)=4-6$ then $((2,6),(3,4))\in R$, and $4-6=-2\in\Bbb Z$
 
I am thinking about the values of those parameters which can give the positive eigenvalues of the matrix A
I am thinking of doing it computationally but how to ?
 
@MatheinBoulomenos well, because we have only take an example which included an equal sign :P, but it seems that any math formula can be written using equal sign, as you have shown
@MatheinBoulomenos so the final answer would be $\Bbb Z$, right?
 
it should be $\exists c \in \Bbb N_0: a+c=b$ by the way
@BAYMAX the characteristic polynomial will be quadratic, you can solve the quadratic in terms of the parameters and then you have to consider when the parameters give you positive roots. This could lead to some difficult inequalities, depending on how your entries depend on the on the parameters
@manooooh for the example you gave, yes
 
9:00 PM
Ok, so finally the question had sense.. Thanks!
 
@BalarkaSen
 
yes@MatheinBoulomenos but the equation is bit complicated, hence I was thinking of using computation
 
@MatheinBoulomenos please help me finding the set where the inequality $a\leq b$ is defined, knowing that $a,b\in\Bbb Z$ and $aSb\iff a\leq b$
I suspect that it is also $\Bbb Z$, but I am not sure
 
it's defined on $\Bbb Z$, since $a,b \in \Bbb Z$ as you said
 
lol
 
9:09 PM
@LeakyNun lol what? :)
@MatheinBoulomenos thanks!!
 
9:30 PM
quadruple complex...
 
Lol what are you reading
 
@loch Cartan Eilenberg homological algebra
hypercohomology
 
Oh
 
 
2 hours later…
11:42 PM
1
Q: Crystallographic terminology associated with the honeycomb structure

uhohI'm trying to quickly learn basic crystallographic principles in 2D under pressure (it's me whose under pressure, not the lattice) so I'm checking many sources to find those that "speak to me" the best (including this excellent answer). Many sources (books, papers, researcher's websites) cite the...

 
01:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

« first day (3274 days earlier)      last day (1730 days later) »