« first day (1139 days earlier)      last day (3875 days later) » 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

6:17 PM
Evening? Silly Europe (???) its afternoon
 
:)
 
Every prime number except 2, is of the form $4k+1$ or $4k+3$?
 
@marcelolpjunior $4*2+1=9$
$4*3+3=15$
 
I want to say: All known cousins​​, are in this way?
 
every odd number is of the form $4k+1$ or $4k+3$ :P
 
6:29 PM
Tipo: $4\cdot1+3=7$, $4\cdot1+1=5$, $4\cdot3+1=13$ ...
 
6:47 PM
hmmm, I created another cute question ...
$$\prod_{k=0}^{\infty}\left( 1+\frac{2}{2^{2^k}+2^{-2^k}}\right)$$
I also wanna create another version ...
$$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{k}+2^{-k}+2+2^{-1}}$$
Godness .... what a great question!
Here is $$\prod_{k=0}^{\infty}\sqrt[\Large2^k]{ 1+\frac{2}{2^{2^k}+2^{-2^k}}}$$
Actually, they all will be POTDs of the evening. (I mean to me, but if you like them you may consider them the way you want to)
 
7:29 PM
hmmm, I'm need to begin the work on some proofs. (it's enough with creation process :-))
Actually I have some problems that waits for me for some months...
 
@Chris'ssis all of them?
 
@robjohn yeap :-)
 
@Chris'ssis Ah, it looks as if the first telescopes :-)
 
@robjohn Yes.
 
7:44 PM
@robjohn when I try to run the series, Mathematica gives me an error and a window appears with a message like that "Mathematica Kernel for Windows has encountered a problem and needs to close."
 
8:03 PM
I get $6$ for the first one. writing it up now.
to make sure I got the indices right
 
@robjohn hmmm, isn't it $3$?
 
@Chris'ssis Let me finish writing it up to make sure
 
@robjohn ok
 
8:15 PM
I'm having some trouble to answer this question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/492508
does anyone have any ideas for the second part?
 
$$
\begin{align}
\prod_{k=0}^\infty\left(1+\frac2{2^{2^k}+2^{-2^k}}\right)
&=\prod_{k=0}^\infty\left(\frac{\left(2^{2^{k-1}}+2^{-2^{k-1}}\right)^2}{2^{2^k}+2^{-2^k}}\right)\\
&=\prod_{k=0}^\infty\left(\frac{\left(1+2^{-2^k}\right)^2}{1+2^{-2^{k+1}}}\right)\\
&=\left(1+2^{-2^0}\right)\prod_{k=0}^\infty\left(1+2^{-2^k}\right)\\
&=\left(1+2^{-2^0}\right)\prod_{k=0}^\infty\frac{\left(1-2^{-2^{k+1}}\right)}{\left(1-2^{-2^k}\right)}\\
&=\frac{\left(1+2^{-2^0}\right)}{\left(1-2^{-2^0}\right)}\\[12pt]
&=3
 
Does anyone speak french here ? I was wondering how would "E spans F" translate into french ?
 
@robjohn that seems right.
 
@MårtenW can you show that $1-\frac14+\frac19-\frac1{16}+\dots$ is $\frac12$ of $1+\frac14+\frac19+\frac1{16}+\dots$?
 
@robjohn: yes, why?
 
8:24 PM
@MårtenW That should allow you to answer that question.
 
@Jean-FrancoisRossignol not I
 
@robjohn: I don't see how that is of any help, but maybe it is
 
Hello
 
@MårtenW I have expanded the idea into an answer.
 
8:37 PM
@robjohn: I see :) much more elegant than my approach
 
8:53 PM
@Chris'ssis I should look at the second question
 
@robjohn and don't miss the $3$rd one (it's divine). :-)
 
@Chris'ssis okay
 
@Chris'ssis That wasn't the appropriate word!
 
Why do we multiply matrices in the way we do?
 
@Alizter Linear transformations.
 
9:02 PM
We like writing $(f\circ g)(x)$ to mean apply $g$ first, then $f$.
Some group theorists, on the other hand...
 
@KarlKronenfeld Oh?
Usually $f\circ g$ is read $g$ composed with $f$, IIRC.
 
@PeterTamaroff Huh?
 
@KarlKronenfeld Is it not?
$g$ goes first, then $f$.
 
That's what I said initially.
 
@KarlKronenfeld What's with "Some group theorists...?"
 
9:05 PM
@PeterTamaroff Some like to write $xf$ for $f(x)$, and $xfg$ for $g(f(x))$.
 
@KarlKronenfeld Wha..? Really?
 
@PeterTamaroff For instance, Gorenstein adopted that, IIRC.
 
@KarlKronenfeld Guess it has its advantages?
 
@PeterTamaroff I cannot speak for them. For instance, Isaacs uses it in his book, but even he did not explain why.
One reason is that if $X\xrightarrow{f}Y\xrightarrow{g}Z$, then $fg:X\to Z$ is sensible.
 
@KarlKronenfeld Dem peeps like to read from left to right, get it.
 
9:20 PM
@PeterTamaroff Which word? (I was away) :-)
 
@Chris'ssis I meant to say you're quite self praising, that you enjoy your creations a lot, but used the word onanistic, which isn't very delicate.
 
hi guys
 
@Chris'ssis It has a non sexual meaning: self-gratification.
But the word itself derives from a sexual tale in the Bible.
 
@PeterTamaroff hehe, it's not bragging, but I really enjoy those creations. It's something natural. This is me.
 
Why do you like $$\prod_{k=0}^\infty\left(1+\frac2{2^{2^k}+2^{-2^k}}\right)?$$
 
9:24 PM
@PeterTamaroff It's so funnny! Don't you see? :-) Look at the @robjohn's solution.
 
@Chris'ssis Not really.
@Chris'ssis Well, yes, that's why I'm not really amused.
 
@PeterTamaroff a very beautiful telescoping there.
 
Haven't thought of your nested integral.
 
@robjohn Does Mathematica allow you to compute that series (the $2$nd question)?
 
@Chris'ssis I don't know. I haven't tried it
I usually use Mathematica to check my work.
 
9:29 PM
hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
 
@robjohn ok. I was thinking you tried to use it.
@what'sup hello!
 
@Chris'ssis how are you ? :-)
 
@what'sup not in the best shape. How about you? :-)
 
@Chris'ssis not so bad . :-)
 
@PeterTamaroff maybe you're right in way. I think I posted too many questions here.
 
9:33 PM
@Chris'ssis Really? I think not.
There shouldn't be an upper bound.
 
@PeterTamaroff :-)
 
As long as they are good.
 
@Chris'ssis the second version : elementarily ????
 
@what'sup sure.
 
$$
\begin{align}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac1{2^k+2^{-k}+2+2^{-1}}
&=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{2^k}{(2^{k-1}+1)(2^{k+1}+1)}\\
&=\frac23\sum_{k=1}^\infty\left(\frac1{2^{k-1}+1}-\frac1{2^{k+1}+1}\right)\\
&=\frac23\left(\frac1{2^0+1}+\frac1{2^1+1}\right)\\
&=\frac59
\end{align}
$$
 
9:41 PM
:-( i was going to put this
 
@robjohn right!
 
Methinks I picked a bad time to stumble in ...
 
brb
 
@TedShifrin Hey!
Nope!
 
@Peter: Hay to you :)
 
9:43 PM
@Chris'ssis Ouch!!! Sum[1/(2^k + 2 + 1/2 + 1/2^k), {k, 1, Infinity}] causes my Mathematica to restart the Kernel.
 
@robjohn the same to me! :-)
 
@robjohn: Sometimes Mathematica isn't as clever as humans.
 
@TedShifrin Can you tell me your $\Bbb C^3$ problem again?
I forgot it.
 
You're too young to be forgetful:)
 
I'm going to restart Mathematica and see what it does afresh
 
9:45 PM
@TedShifrin Then I just wasn't paying enough attention.
 
My question was (whether in $\Bbb R^3$ or $\Bbb C^3$ or $\Bbb CP^3$) how many lines meet four lines in general position?
 
@Chris'ssis I shut down Mathematica, restarted it, and entered that one line. It beeps and resets the Kernel. Starts with In[1] again
 
@TedShifrin Oh, FOUR lines?
OK.
 
@robjohn the same thing to me. Why is that?
 
Yes. But the exercise you did should give you a good idea.
 
9:47 PM
@Chris'ssis I don't know. I will go to their chat and see if the same happens with Mma 9
 
It's blowing its mind @Chris's sis.
 
@TedShifrin hehe, maybe! :-)
@robjohn OK. Pls let me know if it works on a newer version.
 
@robjohn, have you tried NSum?
 
@TedShifrin Heh!
 
Hmm, or is that even a command? I've forgotten.
goes to computer
Gives me $.5555556$ immediately.
 
9:52 PM
you can go to wolfram and get partial sum values $ \to .5555556 $ :-)
 
@TedShifrin Nope. Just freaked that the kernel restarted for such a simple thing, and pretty quickly, too.
 
When I do Sum, it doesn't crash; it just beeps and returns nothing.
 
@TedShifrin Yes, and you start over at In[1]
 
Oh yeah. True.
 
You lose all your history. That usually means a kernel restart
 
9:54 PM
The first time, In[21] was still there, but not the second.
 
@TedShifrin I don't understand a step in your proof of $\textbf{Theorem 3.2}$
 
@Peter: Which book?
 
@TedShifrin Multiv.
 
@Chris'ssis Mma 9 just leaves it unevaluated.
 
Damn, you confuzle me.
 
9:58 PM
@robjohn ok. Thanks.
 
What bothers you, @Peter?
 
@TedShifrin "...by the usual FTC."
 
@Chris'ssis I don't think there is an upgrade path. I think we have to buy a new copy.
 
is $\Bbb C - \Bbb R = \{i\}$?
 
Oh, nevermind.
 
10:00 PM
That's the definition of the derivative at $0$ of the function given by integrating from $0$ to $h$?
Ugh, no @Alizter
 
@Chris'ssis Try Sum[1/(2^k + 2 + 1/2 + 1/2^k), {k, 1, Infinity}, Regularization -> "Abel"]
 
@robjohn ok
 
Oooh, clever @robjohn.
 
@TedShifrin That is from the Mma chat :-)
 
@robjohn hehe, it works.
 
10:01 PM
@TedShifrin I am not stating anything specifically but i am trying to work out if there is a name for that set?
 
@Chris'ssis and we were right :-)
 
@robjohn :D
 
@Aliter, it's the plane minus the real axis.
 
@TedShifrin oh yeaahhh
 
@TedShifrin (Sorry, I had my mind elsewhere when I read the proof. =)
 
I forgive you this time, @Peter.
@Jen-François: Show that the equality holds when you do one row operation only.
 
Prove that $$|i!|=\sqrt{\frac{\pi}{\sinh\pi}}$$
 
Oops ... Jean, sorry.
 
@Alizter Why do you want to do that?
How do you define $i!$, @Alizter?
 
@PeterTamaroff That is where I was at. I denoted $R_1,\cdots,R_i,\cdots, R_j, \cdots, R_n$ the rows of A
Then I considered a linear combination transformation $R_j$ into $R_j+\lambda R_i$
such that $R_1,\cdots,R_i,\cdots, R_j+\lambda R_i, \cdots, R_n$ are the rows of A'
 
10:14 PM
Gamma function @Peter?
 
@Jean-FrancoisRossignol You don't need to dwell into linear transformations.
 
I know this is true but why does the Vect(R_1,...,R_n)= Vect(R_1,...,R_i,..., R_j+\lambda R_i,...R_n)
 
@Chris'ssis It is only $95 to upgrade the Home Edition
 
@TedShifrin (I know)
 
Better than $295
 
10:15 PM
shuts up and goes to cook dinner :)
 
@robjohn only $95?$ That is like $700 here.
 
@TedShifrin what's cookin'?
 
@PeterTamaroff
 
@robjohn PNUPNUPNUPUNPUNUPNUPUNPUUPNUPNU
 
@PeterTamaroff The Home Edition is $295
 
10:16 PM
Leftovers tonight, @robjohn ... Did salmon and pork chops earlier :)
 
@robjohn Oh, well. It only$^{r}$... $r:$ relatively.
 
@robjohn Yeah, it sounds good.
 
@Chris'ssis Perhaps time to upgrade :-)
 
@Peter, are you anagramming PUN?
 
@TedShifrin I am saying "pun" so fast, it gets mixed up.
 
10:17 PM
You do get upmixed.
 
@PeterTamaroff I know this is true but why does the Vect(R_1,...,R_n)= Vect(R_1,...,R_i,..., R_j+\lambda R_i,...R_n)
 
@Jean-FrancoisRossignol How do you define "Vect(S)" when $S$ is a set of vectors?
 
@Jean-François: Show each is a subset of the other. (competing hints)
 
@TedShifrin I have a question.
@TedShifrin (Again, I know what Vect is, just wondering what he knows, how he uses it)
 
@robjohn yeap.
 
10:19 PM
@Peter: I think my point is what he's missing. My 40 years of teaching experience :)
 
@TedShifrin Heh, sure. You're the boss here, Ted.
 
If I have a family $F=(x_1,...,x_n)$ of a vector space, $x\in Vect(F) \Leftrightarrow \exists (\lambda_1,...,\lambda_n), x=sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_i x_i$
 
No, I don't mean to be an ass ...
 
@PeterTamaroff
 
I'm struggling with my own students on how to show two sets are equal.
Butting out and going to cook
 
10:25 PM
@Jean-FrancoisRossignol You can do this, if you like. First, let's agree to use $\operatorname{span}(v_1,\ldots,v_n)$. Let $V=\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ and $W=\{w_1,\ldots, w_r\}$. Try to show this $$\operatorname{span}V \subseteq \operatorname{span}W $$ if, and only if $v_i\in \operatorname{span}(w_1,\ldots,w_r)$ for each $i=1,\ldots,n$.
 
11:01 PM
@Peter: You may be annoyed with me, but I certainly want you to know i did not downvote — and would never have done so.
 
@TedShifrin Hey, why would I be annoyed with you?
I'm annoyed with this game, it is too hard. Dark Souls.
 
Nice. Very similar to last night's exercise. You see why? :)
 
@TedShifrin The OP's is simply a "translate" of $xy$ for $\lambda <0$.
 
11:20 PM
Well, rotation, when $\lambda=-1$.
 
Bah, spent all day working on a single problem....
Any chance someone here has a strong background in homological algebra?
 
@DanielRust Not here!
 
11:35 PM
@DanielRust What is the problem? Curious.
 
Does an $n$-dimensional commutative cube of abelain group homomorphisms naturally give rise to a chain complex?
 
@Daniel: OK, so When $n=2$ you're defining $\partial$ how?
 
hmmm, is there an easy way to draw commutative diagrams in chat?
 
@DanielRust LOL.
 
as it'd be nice to draw the square
 
11:42 PM
@DanielRust Nope, quite a pain in the arse. Maybe you can just use a drawing software.
 
LOL, I dunno. But I guess I get it. $C_2$ is the upper left, $C_1$ is the sum of the two adjacents, and $C_0$ is bottom right.
 
$$
\newcommand{\ra}[1]{\kern-1.5ex\xrightarrow{\ \ #1\ \ }\phantom{}\kern-1.5ex}
\newcommand{\ras}[1]{\kern-1.5ex\xrightarrow{\ \ \smash{#1}\ \ }\phantom{}\kern-1.5ex}
\newcommand{\da}[1]{\bigg\downarrow\raise.5ex\rlap{\scriptstyle#1}}
\begin{array}{c}
A & \ra{f} & B \\
\da{f'} && \da{g}\\
B' & \ras{g'} & C \\
\end{array}
$$
yay that works for me
ok, so if this is our commutative square:
 
Feels like Mayer-Vietoris ...
 
the chain complex would be $$0\rightarrow A\stackrel{(f,f')}{\rightarrow}B\oplus B'\stackrel{g-g'}{\rightarrow}C\rightarrow 0$$
 
Right, that's what I figured.
 
11:47 PM
for a higher dimensional cube, change the parity of the edges so that each face has an odd number of negative signs
 
Seems like this is just cubical homology?
 
not a term i've heard of before
think google will bring up some good references?
 
Ah ... I saw it in Mosher-Tangora in grad school, if I remember correctly.
Homology modeled on cubes rather than simplices, also good for relating to integration theory.
 
huh thanks Ted
 
Glad I could help ... Or not.
 
11:51 PM
is cubical homology the name referring to the homology theory, or to taking the homology of the chain complex that arises from the above commutative cubes?
 
I'm thinking of cubical chains, rather than simplicial chains.
I'm not sure your application follows immediately. It just reminded me.
 
Ah ok, well hopefully I can find something in the related literature.
 
Sorry :)
 
haha no worries, you've been more help than the people in my office.
Such is life when you have such a small department.
 
Maybe taking one big group to be the direct sum of all of them will make chains with values/coeffs in tht group.
If you ever catch Pete Clark on here (not in chat), I bet he'd know.
 
11:57 PM
I think if it bugs me much longer I'll make it in to a question.
 
OK.
 
I'm hopefully seeing my adviser tomorrow too so I'm sure he'll offer some insight.
Thanks again Ted.
 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

« first day (1139 days earlier)      last day (3875 days later) »