« first day (1579 days earlier)      last day (3738 days later) » 

09:00
good question; he is mentioned in a few wiki articles
ted how come you are here and a professor? to learn to help people better?
you have never asked a question
Haha @beginner ....
ok nevermind just one article
was that a stupid question ted?
sorry
Yes @TedShifrin. This started a few hours ago when someone asked whether $\int_{\Omega} \phi = 0$ for all closed curves $\Omega$ implies $\phi$ is exact.
Then I got caught up in reading about the "Feynman trick" regarding differentiating inside an integral.
Then of course Balarka comes in with his abstract algebra...
09:03
Well, @Kaj, the first part you once knew :D
I definitely know the converse!
@beginner, there are actually a ton of professors active on here.
oh wow but they dont need help
or do they help eachother
That was our "the following three things are equivalent ..." Theorem, @Kaj
no, they like to help probably
I remember, I remember :P
09:05
oh so they are learning to help better?
I like to believe that we're all learning to help others better...
nonetheless some people just enjoy helping students in their free time, even professors
i cant help anyone yet. i answerd my own question twice
I'm not here because I need help for the most part @beginner. I like the $\LaTeX$ practice, and I like to at least try and keep sharp on material I learned in the past. Plus I've met some cool people in the chat here.
am i cool yet?
anyone out there know what fourier transforms are
I need to use it on $f(x)=x^2e^{\frac{1}{2}x}$
09:07
Not to mention that you can't get enough exposition practice, haha
Solving several questions here has been a learning experience, @beginner, but generally we like to teach. Some of us already know how :)
ted talked to me!!
@TedShifrin you know FOurier transforms?
what is exposition?
is that when you send someone out of a country?
@usukidoll you need to transform that function?
09:08
yeah but I don't get how it.... works....
and send out sale goods out of the country?
@usukidoll what do you mean by that? Like you don't understand what it does? You don't understand the computation?
@beginner, was it you asking about $S_3 \times S_3$ the other day?
Some, @usukidoll, but I need to go back to sleep.
You're thinking about exports :P
09:09
awww
@DanZimm the computation part
what is $S_3$?
it might have been but i forgot what $S_3$ is
subspaces?
Wait...
@beginner, where are you from?
LOL
0
Q: Which are the nine Sylow $2$-subgroups of $S_3 \times S_3$? What is the only Sylow $3$-subgroup of $S_3 \times S_3$? And the most important...Why?

BeginnerWhich are the nine Sylow 2-subgroups of $S_3 \times S_3$? What is the only Sylow 3-subgroup of $S_3 \times S_3$? And the most important... why?

^I thought this was you!
oh wow no that looks really hard
i cant say where i am from ted, my parents say no
09:10
Same username and same color avatar.
Interesting @Kaj
i dont even know what a sylow is hehe
i am just trying to learn vector stuff
Yeah, at the time I was impressed how quickly you were picking things up.
@usukidoll ok, well you just multiply $f(x)$ by $e^{-2\pi x \zeta}$ and integrate their product over $x$ from $-\infty$ to $\infty$ - do you understand this and are just concerned about transforming your specific function?
are subspaces like subgroups?
09:13
$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)e^{-i \xi x}$
that's the fourier transform right?
Not really @beginner
and then since the $f(x)=x^2e^{\frac{1}{2}x}$ then that also goes next to the $e^{-i \xi x}$?
I guess a subspace of $\mathbb{R}^n$ would be a subgroup under addition.
$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}[x^2e^{\frac{1}{2}x}e^{-i \xi x}$
and then it goes nuts
what is a subset of $\mathbb{R}^2$ that is not closed under scalar multiplications
09:15
@usukidoll ah yes - you can have a few different types of transforms
so sec
Easy: Choose a subset that doesn't have the origin.
Why is that a good counterexample?
yes that's the integral, let me do some computations
let me try to answer dont spoil kaj
because the scalar can be $0$?
@usukidoll are you familiar with the gamma function or the erf function?
09:17
if that is wrong i give up
Yeah, exactly
wait, ignore that
There'll be lots of other examples, but that's the easiest.
(at least to me)
what if i want to make it hold additive inverse and additive closure
but still not have the scalar multiplictions closure
09:19
@usukidoll I'm not the best at integrating - sorry it's taking so long
So certainly the real line is a subset of $\mathbb{R}^2$. Can you think of a subset of the real line where that fails @beginner?
so any line in $\mathbb{R}^2$?
or the real line is the one at the origin $y=0$?
@DanZimm do I have to use integration by parts twice to get rid of the $x^2$
Well, you could make that work, but I'm suggesting that you only look at the real line - that is the one where all the $y$-coordinates are $0$.
@usukidoll that's what I'm trying now but I'm getting a lot of indeterminate forms and such - now I'm thinking differentiation of a parameter
09:22
I did integration by parts twice but ... I got some weird stuff in return.. I ended up gett $\frac{2}{\sqrt{2 \pi}-i^{3}\xi^{3}}$ which is far from right
@usukidoll ya, I'm along the same lines atm
answer is $(1-\xi^{2})e^{\frac{1}{2}\xi^{2}}$ how the heck is that possible?
atm, no idea
i cant write that @kaj, does this look like $\{(x,y): y=0, x=a\}$?
Yep @beginner
09:24
:/
@Ted you there
Now think of a subset of that which is closed under addition and has additive inverses but not scalar multiplication.
@usukidoll what I'm concerned about is according to that expression we should have $\hat{f}(0) = 1$ but if you plug in $\zeta = 0$ into the definition of the transform you get a divergent integral
what the?
how?
well plug in $\zeta = 0$ then it should be $\int_{-\infty}^\infty x^2 e^{1 / 2 x}$
???!!!?!?!?!
09:28
lol
but we need to find a way to get from that point A to whatever that answer was -_-
eh I've been using zeta sorry, I meant $\xi$
yeah... but how do we even reach there?
reach where?
the supposed answer?
without qualification on it I would say it's wrong for the exact reasoning of when $\xi = 0$
yeah
wait huh.. but according to the book that is the answer
but wow how do we even get there with the Fourier Transform
09:33
what book is this?
Basic Partial Differential Equations
HATE IT!
I can't wait to pass the class and get the fuck out of there....pdes suck...pdes suck more with that book
got an author?
wait let me link you to it
is the question literally "Do the fourier transform of $x^2 e^{1 / 2 x}$? because this seems pretty weird..
I HATE THIS BOOK!
@DanZimm I got the scan from the older version
it said something like use corollary 2 and example 6 from 7.1 to solve the problem
09:36
have a link to it? I want to see what it says
nvm found one, what page/ section?
Chapter 7
@kaj i will keep working at it. hopefully tomorrow i will know it, don't spoil it cause i need to learn. thank you :)!
I'll give you the google link
Yep, I'll be around
@DanZimm go to page 440
09:39
@usukidoll holy cow this book is horrid to read
yeah that's what I mean
dude you wanna know what the average midterm score was
27/40 lol that's a DDDDDDDDDD
ohhh i think i got it already maybe
lol nice
oh yes the amazon preview book has the pages @DanZimm I can see page 440
if $x=a$ can only be even numbers for example, it is closed under addition, and has inverse. but the scalar could make it not even @kaj
09:41
I got a pdf download already, looking on page 440
or is that wrong?
@usukidoll aha are you looking at $2(a)$?
yes !
Not quite...if the scalar is an integer, then an integer times an even integer will be even. But that is the example I was thinking of @beginner
Actually I guess you're right.
if so then it's $f(x) = x^2 e^{{\color{blue} -} 1 / 2 x^{\color{blue} 2}}$
09:43
oh does the scalar need to be a $x=a$?
It was just a weird way of putting it.
?????
The scalar can be any real number @beginner.
your latex broke
oh .-.
So even, say, $c = \pi$ messes things up.
09:43
@usukidoll look again sorry, forgot a }
yea this makes much more sense now
but that still doesn't answer the should we integrate twice la la la thing
so i could have $(x,0)$ $x$ even, and then take $k=1.0001$ and i get $(x,0)$ not even $\mathbb{Z}$
yeah $c=\pi$
:) yay
you make me lol @usukidoll mostly because that's exactly how I think when I do math
sec
this is fun!
09:44
part of example 6 is in here
http://books.google.com/books?id=tVXXD8sJ7uwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Basic+Partial+Differential+Equations&hl=en&sa=X&ei=b-V6VNLJGYKSoQSP2oHQBA&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Basic%20Partial%20Differential%20Equations&f=false
page 425
@usukidoll no, you don't need to integrate anything
ooooooooook
so what do I do :X
Are you really in grade $5$ @beginner?
i am finishing in 2 weeks
Freakin' Balarka is in like grade $8$. It's astonishing.
09:46
hey
I think I am actually more surprised with your English skills than your Math skills @Beginner
What's up @user4215?
who is balarka?
I have no idea...fourier transform is making my head spin
@user4215 Why the Math stack exchange, not the English Chat room?
09:46
@usukidoll it's ok, just take a breath
I've never even heard of that phrase before....
Maybe try English:SE?
anyhow do you see Corollary 2 above?
yeah
$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}[x^2e^{\frac{1}{2}x^2}e^{-i \xi x}$
Why are you not normally online at this time @DanZimm
and nowwwwwwwwwwwwww..........I'm soooooooo stuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk yeahhhhhhh
O_O!
09:47
@Committingtoachallenge because depending on my mood I haven't been coming on
@usukidoll do you see corollary 2? I can write it out here if need be
@DanZimm Oh okay. We need more people to talk to at this time ahaha.
properties of FOurier Transform... yes please right it ^_^
do we like direct sub or something?
literally 0 integration, I promise, sec
$$\hat{\left( x^n f(x) \right)} = i^n \frac{\mathrm{d}^n}{\mathrm{d \xi^n}} \hat{f}(\xi)$$
note that $\hat{f}$ stands for the fourier transform of $f$
so what do I do with that? O_O!
now the example says that $$ \hat{(e^{-1 / 2 a x^2})}(\xi) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{a}} e^{-1 / 2 a^{-1} \xi^2}$$
09:52
yup but we to get rid of that a right?
hrm? if you stare at these two statements long enough with your problem next to it you'll get it I'm sure
because I think that's for $e^{\frac{1}{2}ax^2}$ and we don't have an a for the $f(x)=x^2e^{\frac{1}{2}x^2}$
oh yes
sorry, misread what you typed
"If you stare at [X] long enough..." Sounds like me doing math most of the time :)
also dont forget the negative @usukidoll
$e^{{\color{blue} -} 1 / 2 x^2}$
09:55
oh yea
without it the integrals diverge!
:P
so we should have something like this
$\hat{(e^{-1 / 2 x^2})}(\xi) = e^{-1 / 2 \xi^2}$ ?
@usukidoll looks good to me O.o
hmmm that takes care of one part
what about ... how do we get .... $(1-\xi^2)$ now?
Check out the corollary 2 that I posted
09:58
$\hat{\left( x^n f(x) \right)} = i^n \frac{\mathrm{d}^n}{\mathrm{d \xi^n}} \hat{f}(\xi)$
ahhhh... HOLD UP! let n =2.. then we have...
$\hat{\left( x^2 f(x) \right)} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d \xi^2}} \hat{f}(\xi)$
holding
then........ now how does that become $(1-\xi^2)$
keep working ;)
-_- how?
well what's $f(x)$ for us?
09:59
is that corollary telling me second derivative for the fourier transform
$f(x)=x^2e^{-\frac{1}{2}x^2}$
yes, sorry I was being vague, ok first we know the fourier transform of just the second term in that product, we know the fourier transform of $x^2 g(x)$, what can we do then?
Since by corollary 2
$\hat{\left( x^n f(x) \right)} = i^n \frac{\mathrm{d}^n}{\mathrm{d \xi^n}} \hat{f}(\xi)$ if $n=2$ because we have $x^2$ in $f(x)$, we have
$\hat{\left( x^2 f(x) \right)} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d \xi^2}} \hat{f}(\xi)$
good
now those are general $f$'s there, not our specific $f(x)$
inverse fourier transform?
so let's just relabel them to be $g$ to avoid confusion
10:01
uhhhhh
From the example we have
$\hat{(e^{-1 / 2 x^2})}(\xi) = e^{-1 / 2 \xi^2}$
so um?!
in other words we have $\widehat{(x^n g(x))} = i^n \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi^n} \hat{g}(\xi)$
right?
uh wait
now that's correct, and this is for any $g(x)$
what would a good $n$ be and a good $g(x)$ be in order to find out the fourier transform of our function?
errr
stuck :O
Ok, we want to tranform $f(x) = x^2 e^{- 1 / 2 x^2}$ right?
in other words we want $\widehat{(x^2 e^{- 1 / 2 x^2})}$
do we have a formula for anything like this?
10:06
hmmm
what about the fourier transform thing with the integration?
you can do it that was but it will be much more complicated
and involve integration by parts
true and I already went batty on it
so use these nice theorems :D
10:08
so what is the easier way of doing this
O+O!
how?! the?
hrm? First use the formula for transforming $x^2 f(x)$ and then put $f(x) = e^{- 1 / 2 x^2}$
$\hat{\left( x^2 f(x) \right)} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d \xi^2}} \hat{f}(\xi)$
$\hat{\left( x^2 e^{- 1 / 2 x^2} \right)} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d \xi^2}} \hat{f}(\xi)$
??
now replace $\hat{f}$ with what it should be for that $f(x)$
in other words we have $\widehat{(x^2 f(x))} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi^2} \hat{f}$ so putting $f(x) = e^{-1 / 2 x^2}$ we should have $\widehat{(x^2 e^{-1 / 2 x^2})} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi^2} \widehat{(e^{-1 / 2 x^2})}$
$\hat{\left( x^2 e^{- 1 / 2 x^2} \right)} = i^2 \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d \xi^2}} \hat{f}(e^{\frac{1}{2}\xi^2}}$
NARGH THIS CODE AIN'T WORKING
hmmmmm
do you follow what I wrote up there?
10:14
hey isn't $i^2 = (-1)$?
yep ;D
so wait a sec does this mean that we need to take 2 derivatives of $(e^{-\frac{1}{2}x^2}$ well that x should be $\xi$
$e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2}$
and then we take two derivatives of that function?
wait, note the hat
in other words its the fourier transform of $e^{-1 / 2 x^2}$ and then take the derivative of that twice
with respect to $\xi$
10:17
so we need to use the fourier transform table to figure out what that is
Hint: remember example 6
$\hat{(e^{-1 / 2 x^2})}(\xi) = e^{-1 / 2 \xi^2}$
and then we take 2 derivatives?
sounds good to me
are you following how I'm coming up with this?
sort of
ok well let me know what you don't understand and I'll try to help!
10:20
so the first derivative is $-\xi e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2}$?
looks good to me
now take a derivative of that
$\xi^2 e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2}$
hmmm I wonder why that e is still sticking around
but what the heck is with the negative in the asnwer? unless I'm not suppose to cancel the negatives out o0o
product rule for differentiation
but then that $\xi$ would be a constant
hrm?
10:27
$-\xi e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2} $

product rule leaving the $\xi$ alone and then deal with $e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2} $. Then leave $e^{\frac{-1}{2}\xi^2} $ alone deal with $-\xi$
yea, exactly
$\xi (-\xi e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2 }) + e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2}(\xi)$ assuming $\xi$ is a constant
oh no you don't assume $\xi$ to be constant there
you're taking a derivative with respect to $\xi$!
10:30
??????
yeah I'm trying to X_D
$\xi (-\xi e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2 }) - e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2}(\xi)$
$ (-\xi^2 e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2 }) - e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2}(\xi)$
I think x.x
missing a negative on the first term
I thought I put it?
there should be two minus signs ;P
I did :(
$(-\xi^2 e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2 }) - e^{\frac{-1}{2} \xi^2}(\xi)$
in other words we want $\frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d} \xi^2} (e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2})$ so we do our first derivative and get that this equals $\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \xi} ( - \xi e^{-1 / 2 \xi^2})$
now to do this derivative we product rule so we get $(- \xi)^2 e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2} - e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2}$
so overall we get $\xi^2 e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2} - e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2}$
now factor out the $e$ business and remember you had an $i^2$ in front
10:36
$[e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2}] \xi^2 - 1$
$i^2 [[e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2}] \xi^2 - 1]$
and $i^2 = -1$
$(-1)[[e^{- 1 / 2 \xi^2}] \xi^2 - 1]$
holy shit that was lengthy
I think the x^4 one is easier... because the second part is already given as that example
it's probably because my class hasn't learned it yet... doing it on Monday but I wanted to get ahead because section 6.4 on my book is fricking proofs
i see
10:38
so I figured if I do all the Fourier Transform problems which is pure computation I can get back to 6.4
as in do the easier ones first and save the worst for last
but yeah the book sucks doesn't it?
and oh let's add more insult to injury by having the only professor who makes f load of mistakes in the lecture too .... every ... time..........gawd
yes in my opinion
and that stinks
I know D:
but that course is a 400 level math course and I needed it
at least the final exam is a take home exam hahahhaha
nice lol
hmm what does it mean to be absolutely integrable? these problems are scary shiz
page 463...it's viewable on amazon's preview area
you can integrate the absolute value of it
10:49
what the? how do I integrate this mess? $[e^{ibx}f(ax)]^{\xi}$ ?
what's $f(ax)$?
rather $f(x)$
$[e^{ibx}f(ax)]^{\xi}=\frac{1}{a}f[hat](\frac{-\xi-b}{a})$
I need to show that $f(x)$ is absolutely integrable on $(-\infty,\infty)$
page 463 on the preview book in amazon has the theorem
ughhhhhhhh no wait
I'll latex the theorem that's the wrong one-_-
ya I was like huh? lol
what page is it I have the full book
what about this page?
10:55
ah here

Absolutely integrable
A real or complex-valued function defined on $(-\infty, \infty)$ is said to be absolutely integrable on $(-\infty, \infty)$ if \int_{-R}^{R} \mid f(x) \mid dx$ exists for all $R>0$ and $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mid f(x) \mid dx \equiv$ as limit R approaches infinity $\int_{-R}^{R} \mid f(x) \mid dx < \infty$
hmmm my latex broke apart for some reason
I see what youre talking about in the book tho
ah here

Absolutely integrable
A real or complex-valued function defined on $(-\infty, \infty)$ is said to be absolutely integrable on $(-\infty, \infty)$ if $\int_{-R}^{R} \mid f(x) \mid dx$ exists for all $R>0$ and $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mid f(x) \mid dx \equiv$ as limit R approaches infinity $\int_{-R}^{R} \mid f(x) \mid dx < \infty$
gotcha pokemon
that's the absolutely integrable theorem
so I need to use that for those funky problems

« first day (1579 days earlier)      last day (3738 days later) »