« first day (1495 days earlier)      last day (3821 days later) » 

12:00
Again, not written by a mathematician
@IceBoy: Again, who is IceGirl? Is she hot?
2
@Alizter A ring $R$ is called Noetherian if every ascending chain of ideals eventually stabilize, i.e., if $I_n$ are ideals of $R$ and there is no infinitely long ascending chain $I_0 \subset I_1 \subset I_2 \subset I_3 \subset I4 \subset \, \cdots$. Prove that if $R[X]$ is Noetherian so is $R$.
Icey hot @Nick
@BalarkaSen I will do
12:03
@IceBoy: Temperatures below 0 Kelvin are hot. You're the first mathematician I've heard saying it!
@BalarkaSen So there is a maximal ideal?
@Khallil True.
basically
@r9m
r9m
r9m
12:07
kya ?
@IceBoy: Nope, I can't do it. Do you know any more mind bending logical phrases similar to "I am a liar"
@r9m Abhi bhi gusse mein kya? :O :|
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik nahi :P .. kyun ?
This sentence is false.
@r9m that kya reply, seemed deadly :D
r9m
r9m
12:08
-_-
@IceBoy I am a verb.
@r9m Eww, sorry. Want some geometry? :)
sorry i got disconnected
@Alizter Yes.
Is there a simpler way of finding an expression for this?
$\displaystyle \bigcup_{x \in [0,1]} [x,1] \times [0,x^2] = \{ (x,y) : x \in [f,1], y \in [0,f^2] \text{ for } f \in [0,1] \}$
hey, who starred that?
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik maybe ..
12:11
@BalarkaSen not me really!
@r9m
1. $\angle A=80^{0}, AI+IB=BC$, $I$ incenter, find $\angle B$.
2. $al_a=bl_b=cl_c$ such that $l_a$, $l_b$, $l_c$ are angle bisectors of $\angle A$, $\angle B$... Prove its an equilateral $\triangle$.
@Sawarnik I read Devil's Foot and Red Circle.
Terrific!
What else would you recommend me, @Sawarnik?
@BalarkaSen Awesome.
@BalarkaSen What can i recommend, each one is nice!
Do you imagine Sherlock to be you yourself sometimes? :D
Exactly why I can't decide what to read.
Random.
@Sawarnik I am a much, much lesser mortal.
12:15
@BalarkaSen Sherlock is also a mortal btw.
Hello
I have a question: How do you calculate $8 \cong x (mod 13)$ ?
But true :P
@Carp Hi.
@r9m RU gonna do tat? -_-
@Carpediem Just take multiples of 13 and add 8.
You want to solve, not calculate, right?
Solution of $x = 8$ modulo 13 is a set, btw, not just a number.
Any ideas, @BalarkaSen & @Alizter?
@Chris'ssis I just checked, and Mathematica agrees with me :-)
12:18
what, @Khallil?
8 mins ago, by Khallil
Is there a simpler way of finding an expression for this?
$\displaystyle \bigcup_{x \in [0,1]} [x,1] \times [0,x^2] = \{ (x,y) : x \in [f,1], y \in [0,f^2] \text{ for } f \in [0,1] \}$
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik both of e'm .. simple :|
@r9m Yes, I know.
But I thought that you didn't even see them. It is simple. Tell me how you ll do it?
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik okay
I know that it looks like $\displaystyle \int_{0}^{1} x^2 \text{ d}x$, but I can't find a nice way of expressing the union in a simpler way, @BalarkaSen.
12:20
Draw it.
(Also, there isn't a solution against which I can check the answer.)
@Nick IceBoy must be very tired.
I've drawn it, @BalarkaSen.
what d'you get?
@Alizter Boys I think.
@r9m How will you do it? :O
r9m
r9m
12:22
@Sawarnik well I'll start with drawing a triangle ... then draw a lol cat sitting on it .. and voila we have a lol cat sitting on it ..
Oh wait. Can I just say that the union is equal to $\{ (x,x^2) : 0 \leqslant x \leqslant 1 \}$, @BalarkaSen?
@r9m lol :D .. now will you do that? :P :P
@Khallil something like that, yes. I am not the one drawing it, now!
Cool!
Thank you!
The intersection between those Cartesian products will of course be $\varnothing$.
They are all parallel lines which don't intersect.
Some say they intersect at infinity.
12:25
@IceBoy Depends on what one means by "infinity"
Of course, I can define "infinity" at the point all the parallel lines meet, and adjoin it to $\Bbb R$
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik lol cats are nice :P .. however I hate cats :P
That's the standard construction of projective plane over R.
Free. Your. Mind.
@Khallil Hmm.
@IceBoy A much more geometrically sound construction is to draw parallel lines on a sheet of page (that is your reals) and identify the four corners by a bit of glue.
ta-da ta-da you have the riemann sphere
and now i gotta go
byes
Later
12:29
bye
I am my best friend, @Sawarnik. =P
I have a rough idea of what you mean by intersecting at infinity, @IceBoy, but $x$ has been restricted to $[0,1]$ in the example.
^_^
As long as you state your restriction explicitly, you will be ok.
"As a child I was beaten. Now I have a mental condition called respect for others".
Like saying "for all real numbers"
Respect the real numbers.
12:50
@BalarkaSen Clearly $R\subset R[X]$ therefore if $R[X]$ has a maximal ideal $K$ then the maximal ideal $I$ of $R$ is $I\subset K$ therefore $R$ has a maximal ideal and is noetherian.
Obviously there is some things to flesh out
Their properties form the bases for computation in arithmetic and in algebra
@IceBoy Do you study math?
@sarah Do you study maths?
yes ^_^
I try.
^_^
13:00
Godzilla seems such a stupid movie to me. I couldn't watch it entirely. Actually I barely can watch a movie from the beginning to the end.
@Khallil Nope asking questions
@IceBoy What do you study?
@Chris'ssis I found it quite amusing as a schild
@Chris'ssis Especially with the cliche. We didn't have any tape
@Alizter Yeah, it's a movie for kids.
Does anybody listen to The Killers?
13:03
@Chris'ssis King kong is a movie that is hard to watch more than once
3 hours....
@Alizter Indeed ...
@Khallil I am listening now
and now I have stopped
back to bach
Those are pretty good.
Yellowcard is another good band.
@Khallil That is a wierd music video
not the weirdest
I've seen weirder!
The song is great. I didn't actually watch the video all the way through.
13:06
I have seen one with just dicks.
dicks everywhere
it was like game of thrones
Thanks for letting us know, @sarah.
^_^"
np
Share my knowledge of math and music
@Khallil Why did you lie to @V-Moy? :P
I didn't!
What did you say?
13:08
Nothing.
Nothing at all.
Hey, look! A sparrow!
liys
lol
You did :P
Caught it!
Phew.
This is pretty awful
What game?
13:09
Ugh, terrible song, @sarah.
That was Pokémon Fire Red, @Sawarnik.
I'm not actually playing it.
Although I do need to finish Pokémon X.
Ugh @Khallil
This is reallly weird
@sarah Are you a girl?
@Sawarnik Does it matter?
@sarah Your age?
13:11
Older than you
Oooh.
Are you gonna take that, @Sawarnik?
Older than Khallil? @sarah
This is freaky
Please stop, @sarah.
thats what he said
13:14
Tell me less, @sarah.
Tell ... me ... less.
I am kidding
@Khallil Why is Sarah so serious?
Those are pretty awful music videos though
@Sawarnik Because she is the Joker from batman
Oow. Oops.
[But not that witty]
13:16
@sarah is 19
@Alizter You got rid of all the fun OLO
Anywayy... Anyway to explicity find all solutions to $x^2=2^x$
$x=2$
all
thats trivial
Trivial is how I roll.
$2\log(x) = x\log(2)$
$\implies \dfrac{\log(x)}{x} = \dfrac{\log(2)}{2}$
$x=4 \implies \dfrac{2\log(2)}{4} = \dfrac{\log(2)}{2}$
I think those are the only integer solutions.
The rest are just ... ugh.
Do you go to university, @sarah?
@Khallil yes
13:24
In the UK?
However you cannot take log of a negative argument
@Khallil I won't tell you my location
and I tend to use amaericized and englishised english
Oh, I see. Well, that makes sense.
:E
That's cool, I didn't expect you to.
@sarah Split the function into $x^{1/x}=\sqrt 2$ and then look at positive and negative branches
or however many branches ther are (alot I thnk)
@sarah I you looking for complex or real solutions?
13:27
real
@sarah then there are about 3
two for positive x's
and another one which is weird
but is there
huh?
For a negative x
oh
I think it is transcendental
13:29
balls
Why are we doing math on a Sunday?
Time to watch The O.C. :D
@Khallil I go to mathematical church
Actually, before that.
Are you the Archbishop of Cantorbury, @sarah?
yes. I am also the pope of planet zorg
2
and the leader of scientology
If $\displaystyle \bigcup_{\alpha \in I} A_{\alpha} = \bigcap_{\alpha \in I} A_{\alpha}$ for some index set $I$, is it sensible to conclude that all the $A_{\alpha}$ are equal?
13:32
@Alizter what is transcendental?
The negative real solution for $x^2 = 2^x$, @BalarkaSen.
@BalarkaSen did you see my argument?
@Alizter what argument?
@BalarkaSen For the noetherian rings
nope.
link me.
13:34
44 mins ago, by Alizter
@BalarkaSen Clearly $R\subset R[X]$ therefore if $R[X]$ has a maximal ideal $K$ then the maximal ideal $I$ of $R$ is $I\subset K$ therefore $R$ has a maximal ideal and is noetherian.
What do you think of my conclusion for property of the union and intersection of the indexed sets $A_{\alpha}$, @BalarkaSen and @Alizter?
(It's in scrolling distance, only a few messages up.)
@Khallil Yes
@Khallil If you prove it for the single union and intersection case then do it by induction for the rest.
However for infinite sets it might not work
grrr internet.
@BalarkaSen What is wrong?
@Alizter almost certainly your method is wrong. i need not to check.
@Alizter got disconnected, as usual
13:40
@BalarkaSen Well thanks :)
@Alizter Your method shows that if $R$ is a Noetherian ring then it's subrings are also Noetherian.
That is not true.
@BalarkaSen That is true
It can be shows that $k[x, y]$ is Noetherian but it's subring $k[x, xy, xy^2, xy^3, \cdots]$ is not (that even you can prove).
this is beyond me then
@Alizter You need ascending chain conditions instead of tweaking and twiddling with maximal elements. Hint : Prove that if $R$ is Noether, so is $R/I$ for some ideal $I$.
@Alizter Wait, I don't get it. How do you even know that $I$ exists?
13:46
@BalarkaSen I would need to flesh it out
Cases that I does and does not
any ideal will do
@Alizter A field is a Noetherian ring. Every integral domain is a subring of its field of fractions. Not every integral domain is Noetherian.
@Daniel Ah, good example! Thanks.
@DanielFischer We are talking about rings whose polynomial rings are noetherian
@Alizter We are contradicting your argument.
Subring of a Noetherian ring need not be Noetherian.
yes I know
r9m
r9m
13:53
@Sawarnik wanna try an inequality ? $3(x^2y+y^2z+z^2x)(xy^2+yz^2+zx^2) \ge (x^2+xy+y^2)(y^2+yz+z^2)(z^2+zx+x^2)$
@Alizter Oh great, how do you know?
@Alizter If $R_1 \subset R_2$ and $R_2$ has a maximal ideal, then $R_1$ need not to have one. Thus your approach is void.
@r9m Eww :|
r9m
r9m
@Sawarnik try it for some time .. :) (its there in 2009 math reflection issue 3)
:| Ok :|
@r9m Did you try that geom? :)
13:59
@r9m multiplying both sides by $(x-y)(y-z)(z-x)$, maybe?

« first day (1495 days earlier)      last day (3821 days later) »