« first day (1710 days earlier)      last day (3608 days later) » 

19:00
that satisfies certain intuitive properties that we know of length
well, is cantor set finite to you?
yes
since it has measure zero
it can be proven
ok, i dunno what a measure is
<--- knows zero measure theory
Knows measure zero sets.
oh a measure is just a way of assigning length of set for example a measure has to satisfy the following
u($\phi$) = 0
and suppose that the sequence of sets that are disjoint then there measure will be the addition of each measure of each individual one.
and the second property it is non-negative
19:03
@Chris'ssis you back now?
if you're intuition is based on measure theory, then i suggest you ask someone else. i am not the right person :)
but you need none of these stuff : all you want is your open cover definition
it's intuitive enough
I saw the proof
yeah
When Chris comes back I am going to post more pictures.
19:07
Spare us @JasperLoy
@BalarkaSen I will post a picture of Professor Balarka.
@BalarkaSen Have you heard of Professor V S Sunder in India?
@JasperLoy Spare me, then.
how does that topology proof start?
@JC574 LoL
@JC574 By praying god !
@JC574 All proofs start with a character.
19:13
@BalarkaSen a matrix can also be defined as a collection of vectors right?
@SayanChattopadhyay Yeah
@SayanChattopadhyay It is not about how it can be defined. It is about whether you know what it is or not.
@SayanChattopadhyay It is usually defined as a rectangular array of numbers, not a collection of vectors, even though you can view it as such.
@SayanChattopadhyay er, kind of. but it's pretty useless done that way.
unless you want to look at column spaces and some such
19:15
@FreeMind 'By praying to God!', bad English there.
@JasperLoy Believe or not, I did it on purpose :)
@SayanChattopadhyay Learning the linear algebra in Apostol will prepare you for more linear algebra later on.
@FreeMind I don't believe you.
@JasperLoy Probably, I wanted to find the Grammarian of the chat room :))
@Sayan looking at it as a collection of vectors is equivalent to the parallelogram-description i told above, btw
@FreeMind My grammar is very bad.
19:16
okay..
@BalarkaSen Do you still resent problem solving ?
the sides of the parallelogram are the columns of the matrix, etc.
@JasperLoy Oh, I should have said it's none of your damn business, tongue in a cheek.
@sayan is at the very beginning stage of developing your mathematical maturity, so take your time to think about things.
@LeGrandDODOM if it's a good problem, i have no objection
19:18
@JasperLoy Awful sentence : "@sayan is at the very beginning stage of developing your mathematical maturity"
:)
@FreeMind Yes, it's none of my damn business, sorry to offend you.
how will i describe rows like @BalarkaSen the diagonals of the parallelogram
@JasperLoy None taken :)
rows are kinda irrelevant.
@FreeMind I told you my grammar is bad.
19:19
okay.............they are not of much significance
@FreeMind Never seen you in chat before, did you have another name?
@JasperLoy When your grammar is bad, why the hell do you try to correct people? Improve yourself !
@FreeMind I improve myself by correcting others.
@BalarkaSen would this math.stackexchange.com/questions/1227941/… be a good problem with respect to your standards ?
@JasperLoy Sorry to offend you, it is none of your damn business !
19:19
but you can look at them as diagonals of the parallelogram, sure
@FreeMind I have no business, I am not a businessman.
@BalarkaSen Let G be a topological group, let K be a compact subset of G, and let
U be an open subset of G such that K ⊆ U. Then, there is an open set V containing
the identity such that KV ⊆ U.
@JasperLoy So keep windowshoppin'
can you give me example with respect (R,+) with the standard topology on R?
@LeGrandDODOM Eh, well, I just don't see why I should consider it as important.
19:21
if we take [-2,2] it is subset (-3,3). [-2,2] + (-1,1) = (-3,3) subset of (-3,3)
correct?
@BalarkaSen
@KarimMansour Correct
@KarimMansour that looks right
My car is coming to the of its life.
@FreeMind So you're familiar with Lie theory ?
19:24
I am familiar with lies.
How does the proof for that K1,K2 start? is it really obvious?
@LeGrandDODOM Yup!
@FreeMind do you want a challenge ?
yeah @JC574 Define L1 = K1 - U1 and L2 = K2 - U2. we can notice this is closed subset of X since K1 is compact and X is haussdorf so K1 is closed.
@LeGrandDODOM At the moment, I cannot compete but if it's in pdf form I can take a look at it later.
19:28
@JC574 so we then deduce that Li is each closed.
since it closed in hausdorff then it means its compact.
wait i think i misread the statement
@JC574 yes, it is. chuck out the bits of $K_1, K_2$ not in $X$.
@FreeMind nah, this is a short question
are we given K1,K2?
those are the desired $U_1$ and $U_2$s
yes, @JC574
19:29
ahaha
i think i just misread the question
what did you assume @JC574 ?
am I right in saying we have compact $K \subseteq $ where $X$ is hausdorff
and open $U_1,U_2$ covering $K$
19:30
and we want to find $K_1,K_2$?
no, we have to find an open U_1 and U_2 covering K
haha yeah i misread the question
@JasperLoy Back, but now I need to continue my work on book. No need for other pictures, any excess is not good, people might be angry with that.
is what I've written at all true?
i.e
is it true that given $X$ hausdorff, $K \subseteq X$ compact, and open $U_1,U_2$ covering $K$, then we can find compact $K_1,K_2$ with union $K$, and $K_i \subseteq U_i$ ?
Let $M_n(\mathbb R)$ be the space of $n\times n$ matrices with real entries. Consider $M_n(\mathbb R)$ as a Lie algebra with the usual Lie bracket. Let $A,B\in M_n(\mathbb R)$ such that $B[A,B]=[A,B]B$. Prove that $[A,\exp(B)]=\exp(B)[A,B]$
19:33
@JC574 let $K_i = U_i$ :P
@JasperLoy btw, hope you'll continue correcting my English, I like that. ;) Any learning opportunity is welcome.
what if $U_i$ aren't compact?
sorry
ok, fair.
$K_i \subseteq U_i$
i mean
i think it's false
19:36
hmm yeah
coming up with an explicit counterexample would be a bit tedious, though
it's obviously false, however.
@BalarkaSen I have a problem for you. Prove that the exponential map over complex invertible square matrices is surjective
@Chris'ssis OK, I won't post any more pictures. The next one I will post is myself, LOL.
@LeGrandDODOM I haven't studied the exponential map yet. I'll note it though, thanks.
yeah @BalarkaSen
19:41
Hallo @Alessandro
@evinda Aha!
@JasperLoy OK ;)
@evinda Hallo! Wie geht's?
Ganz ok..Dir? @Alessandro
Hello
:D
19:44
Hi
3n+1 is pretty cool :D :D :D :D
I proved it by strong induction lol
the collatz conjecture yeah actually you can generalize it to qn + 1 conjecture
The two superman emblems is a bit confusing.
where q is prime.
@alkabary was that back at the beginning of the month?
19:45
@evinda mir auch
@LeGrandDODOM Which book did you use while studying linear algebra?
@robjohn One is a Superman, one is a Superwoman, oh Mean Square.
@BalarkaSen which one are you using?
can anyone help me with some algebraic curves?
Artin, mostly, but you wouldn't be able to pick stuff up from that book, @Sayan.
19:48
@BalarkaSen I don't have a book that teaches concepts, but only problem books like amazon.fr/Alg%C3%A8bre-Oraux-x-ens-Serge-Francinou/dp/… and amazon.fr/Exercices-math%C3%A9matiques-Oraux-x-ens-alg%C3%A8bre/…
Many complains about it's user-unfriendly mathematical language.
@robjohn I wonder what happened to skull.
@BalarkaSen its, not it's
how is gilbert strang's book?
@BalarkaSen complain, not complains
@JasperLoy don't know.
19:49
@robjohn Hope he is still alive.
@SayanChattopadhyay no idea
@SayanChattopadhyay Finish Apostol first. =)))
i am doing that only dear jasper
@SayanChattopadhyay When you almost finish Apostol, ask me and I will recommend you a linear algebra book.
@JasperLoy he was on main 17 hours ago, but hasn't been to chat in 76 days
19:51
@robjohn He is using another account, infinitesimal or sth like that.
@robjohn how can be explained the fact that there are so many MSE users and so few MSE Chat users ... ?
@Chris'ssis Because nobody wants to chat?
i have to redo continuity again and do the exercises of the last part of the integrals
@Chris'ssis so few, not so less
@JasperLoy right, thanks
19:54
@Chris'ssis They are scared of the pictures I post.
Ha great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i got the idea
@robjohn Time to repin chat guidelines.
@JasperLoy :-)
@Chris'ssis The next picture you post must be yourself, LOL.
@TedShifrin whenever you're back, can i have another hint about $l(K-D)$? I can't get anywhere using the degree..
19:56
@JasperLoy I don't post pictures any more (as you saw, some people were angry with that). It's not the right place for that. ;)
@Chris'ssis OK, you can email me.
@SayanChattopadhyay I will now recommend you a very good LA book.
And what is it???????????????
@Chris'ssis Many users on MSE have been there once, looked at something and not really participated much. The people on chat are on site more frequently.
@SayanChattopadhyay Peter Petersen's Linear Algebra.
@JasperLoy Nice name
20:01
@ᴇʏᴇs UCLA professor
@robjohn Yeah, possible.
@JasperLoy Nice school
@ᴇʏᴇs As nice as you.
@ᴇʏᴇs When you said your wish was for me to get well, I was touched.
@SayanChattopadhyay This book is a new book and is not well known, but I assure you it is excellent.
@JasperLoy Is it super hard
Any book assured by Balarka or jasper has to be good
20:04
@ᴇʏᴇs No, it's for undergrads.
@SayanChattopadhyay Most people hate the books I like.
@JasperLoy What kind of undergrads
@ᴇʏᴇs Upper level undergrads.
@JasperLoy Oh, sounds too hard for me then :(
I think i got to sleep now its very late at night here
@ᴇʏᴇs No you are upper level already, not freshman.
20:06
@Alessandro Was machst du so in den Ferien?
@JasperLoy My knowledge is that of a high schooler
@ᴇʏᴇs Same here.
@evinda Ich musste während dieser Woche in die schule gehen :(
@robjohn You spoken to Peter Petersen before?
@JasperLoy No, should I have?
20:07
@JasperLoy Determinants are introduced at the very end of the book. No wonder Axler is on the editorial board
@robjohn I don't know. He works there.
@Alessandro Achso... Und was hast du gelernt?
@evinda You speak German?
@JasperLoy Yes, I do.
@evinda What is the best book to learn German?
@LeGrandDODOM He just happens to be on the board for that series.
20:15
@Alessandro With which book did you start? @Alessandro
Salut, @leDodo
@evinda @JasperLoy The book used in my course is called "schritte plus", there are 6 volumes (two for A1, two for A2 and 2 for B1), I also bought a copy of "Hammer's german grammar and usage", it is by far the best reference on german grammar
hi, @Jasper, on what grounds do you say it's excellent?
hi @JC574
@evinda @JasperLoy iwdl.de/cms/lernen/start.html this website is supposed to be very good (and it's completely free)
@JC574: If you have a divisor $D$ of degree $0$ that is not the trivial divisor, why must $l(D) = 0$?
20:20
@TedShifrin Uh oh. Questioning my stupidity again. =) I like it that it teaches you how to solve nth order ODEs and systems of n ODEs.
guten Abend, @Alessandro
@TedShifrin guten Abend, wie geht es dir?
@ted In contrast your book only goes into coupled systems.
@JasperLoy There being?
@ted And he goes into both homo and nonhomogeneous cases too.
@robjohn UCLA
20:25
@Jasper: Somehow I don't think of that as the point of a linear algebra class. It's a nice application at the end, but there's so much more to consider ...
@TedShifrin OK, I look for idiosyncratic things like that in a book. I am idiosyncratic.
I'm more worried about students' learning the actual linear algebra and proofs therewith ...
Your two books with geometric approaches is similar to Artin I guess.
Not many books deal with the geometry these days.
well, Artin is in a class by himself
There is one by Frederick Goodman that also deals with the geometry.
So is Ted in his own class.
20:28
yes, ironically, he's an analyst whom I went to grad school with ... I have his algebra book but have never studied it carefully
Isn't he an algebraic geometer?
Oh Goodman.
Artin, yes. Goodman, no, unless he really changed area.
Goodman is a good man. I am a banana.
Es geht, vielen dank, @Alessandro, und Dir?
I am proud to be the librarian for this room @ted.
20:29
LOL
Talking with @JC574 is making me realize how much math I used to know instantaneously and now have to think about ...
Talking with people shows how many books they don't know that I know about.
But I find that I must teach out of a book to really know how good/bad it is ... just looking at it isn't sufficient.
Yeah, I know, I am superficial.
And, of course, I care about exercises more than anything else, and you ignore them.
Yeah, I really love just the theory itself.
20:32
For example, Petersen also has undergraduate diff geo notes. His have no pictures, and his exercises are crappy by comparison with mine, imho.
No need to say imho, lol.
Well, recommending books that are good for you is not necessarily a good thing for other readers ... You need to assess the level/interest/strength of the student/reader, as well.
Yeah, just expressing my uneducated opinion sometimes. =)
You're far from uneducated ... but you're no more universal than I am :P
I would not be in this chat if I were well. I came to this part of the internet only because I am sick.
20:34
Apostol's Calculus I,II has quite a bit of linear algebra in it, btw.
Yes, indeed, and ODEs as well.
and probability and intro to numerical analysis
Beat me to that.
hmm
oh, there he is
20:35
hey
sorry i went to eat
um
what did you bring me?
No eating is allowed.
i have a banana
You must bring us a hamburger.
Jasper is enough banana for all of us.
20:36
That will be flagged, lol.
That means my banana is HUGE.
bananas is also slang for crazy :P
so $l(D) = 0$ for nontrivial $D$ of degree $0$?
for any nonsingular curve?
yup. Write out the definition.
20:38
I was very depressed the last few hours, so I talked a lot of crap in several rooms, I think maybe tmr the SE staff will email me to scold me.
@Ted your linear algebra lectures are cool. a bit slow, but cool.
@Balarka: They're slow for you, but they go 3 to 4 times faster than I would go in our usual linear algebra class. The multivariable class is our best students on campus.
Do you think linear algebra should be done with abstract algebra in the same book?
Do you think real analysis should be done with complex analysis in the same book?
I love the way Artin integrates stuff, but he too is writing for the cream of the cream ...
so $l(D) = \dim \{f : (f) + D \ge 0\} $... i think i'm being stupid here
20:40
I have been thinking about the above two questions.
again depends on level/audience for sure, @Jasper
I always tell the youngsters here not to forget me when they win the Fields medal, but to you @ted I will say something else, which is...
@ted Don't forget me when you win the Abel prize!
@TedShifrin i am going to watch your lectures though. they provide loads of intuition.
so suppose $D = \sum n_i p_i$, and assume $0 = \deg D = \sum n_i$
ok, @JC574, let's think for a minute ...
20:43
i noticed you are talking about orthogonality a lot, something i have never thought about much.
so let's do $D=p-q$, @JC574. Then you'd have a meromorphic function with one zero and one pole, so it would give a holomorphic one-to-one mapping to $\Bbb P^1$. So the curve would have to have genus $0$.
But if $g>0$, you can't make it work, right?
yes, @Balarka, I stress geometry in (almost) everything I teach :P
i love that.
yeah
In general, you'll have such an $l(D)=1$ precisely when $g=0$, and it has to be $0$ otherwise, @JC574.
@TedShifrin I never appreciated much geometry in my undergrad classes because it was mostly absent. But I finally began to when I saw material elsewhere.
20:46
That's also consistent with Riemann-Roch, I do believe.
@Jasper: I keep trying to get my differential geometry students to draw a picture and use what they know about a circle and basic trigonometry, rather than writing out a page of calculus computation (which takes way too long, anyhow). I have been doing it dozens of times in class, but they just don't work on understanding it themselves.
It's so sad that the geometry is taken out of all these abstract algebra classes.
@TedShifrin when you say in general, you mean for general $D$ with $\deg D = 0$?
yes, @JC574. Sorry to be murky.
Better to be Murky than to be Munkres.
I'm reading Munkres for my topology class and it's ok
20:50
@TedShifrin hey Ted!
heya @Stan :)
Good for you. Maybe I hate the font.
Better than John Lee's Topological Manifolds, at least
No way.
Well, surely the quality of a math book is based on the font, and not on the content or exercises.
7
20:50
Starred.
Totally different content, mr eyeglasses.
Munkres is great text.
@ted Now your reputation is gone.
Yeah, I'm fond of Munkres, but I took the course from him while he was writing it.
But I somehow prefer Simmons over it.
20:51
A meromorphic function with exactly one pole is a biholomorphism
@TedShifrin Someone told me to use Lee's Topological Manifolds as an introductory topology text
Did I need to put <sarcasm> </sarcasm>?
Way too wordy and too advanced for most of it, mr eyeglasses.
The font is actually very impt to me.
@Jasper: You're mostly invalidating yourself ...
@ᴇʏᴇs Different content Bart,
20:52
Simmons has more analysis, which I like, @Balarka, but Munkres's exercises trump Simmons's for sure.
I'm really sorry, I'm still confused about the argument here for general $D$ @TedShifrin
@TedShifrin Fair.
@TedShifrin I hate Simmons more than Munkres. I don't like how he combines the topology and analysis so much
@TedShifrin I'm beginning to dislike non-mathematicians for their lack of rigor. I was told on Econ SE that $$\frac{dy}{dx} = - \frac{\partial U(x,y} / \partial x}{\partial U(x,y)/\partial y}$$ is how economists write this thing called marginal utility of substitution. But to me, that looks like a single variable expression on the left and a multivariable one on the right.
And that makes no sense!
I taught a course called topological analysis, @Jasper, which I made up ... I did Munkres for 1 quarter and then put in a bunch of analysis for the second quarter.
20:53
considers ignoring @Jasper <joke>
Ah, that's the implicit function theorem, @Stan.
People here say point-set topology part of real analysis
are you saying in general $D$ would give a biholomorphism?
OK, I need to pay attention to @JC574.
Ah, okay.
20:53
@ᴇʏᴇs not true.
totally not true.
@TedShifrin I think Whitney wrote a boook called Topological Analysis and another called Analytic Topology LOL
no, I'm not saying that, @JC574.
the bit i'm confused with is why in general $l(D) = 1$ forces $g= 0$
It's sad that Alan Beardon's Complex Analysis and Riemann Surfaces books are both out of print.
Yeah, I used to know this stuff instantaneously, and now I'm stumbling, sorry, @JC574. Haven't taught it in 15 years now :(
20:56
Ted's out of shape :P
no it's fine :) i'm just glad to have all the help you've given, and someone to talk to about this. I don't have any classmates taking this course really
@JC574 You can ask on the main site?
I'm used to thinking about this stuff in terms of sections of line bundles, so I have to retool a bit. Hang on. BTW, write down Riemann-Roch.
He doesn't need to @Jasper. Hang on.
I think I will start using the bus instead of my car, to get to work.

« first day (1710 days earlier)      last day (3608 days later) »