can you drag the link on the alternate link page to the bar?

Yes I can now thanks to your help

good, now when you open a chat window, click on that bookmark and you should see the $\LaTeX$ rendered

It should stay on the page until you refresh or close the page.

I now have a "MathJax" link on my book marks

$$\sqrt{\frac{9}{5}}$$

@Skullpatrol What does the comment that QED just posted look like?

@robjohn a bunch of symbols of the key board

@Skullpatrol did you click on the "MathJax" bookmark on the bar?

@steveO Go here and follow the directions.

hi

1+1=2

I click on the "render MathJax" at math.ucla.edu/~robjohn/math/mathjax.html

Hi

right click and choose view source

@Skullpatrol No, the "MathJax" in your bookmark bar

@rushonerok did you have a question about addition? :-)

@steveO Pretty much. or $$...$$

@robjohn When I click "MathJax" on my bookmark bar it opens up a new window

@Skullpatrol :-( that shouldn't happen.

Find someone here who uses Chrome. I know it has been successfully installed.

javascript:(function(){if(window.MathJax...

copy that from here meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/1088/…

@QED is that what is in the window?

no

You need to bookmark this javascript thing

@robjohn Oops it doesn't open a new window ... it takes me to a new page

Err, stupid question. Can you do it offline if you have js installed?

yes

@Skullpatrol what page?

@anon, you need the mathjax scripts and files, but you can download all those

bah, not worth it when I already have MikTeX working

@anon I think it will work if you install the MathJax server, but the bookmark is wired to their server as is

@robjohn This page math.ucla.edu/~robjohn/math/mathjax.html

Ah, I was wondering if it was pointing to an online host.

yeah it is

@anon I use CMacTeX, but I have started using MathJax in BBEdit since it processes webpages. I get quicker feedback about what the LaTeX will look like.

Did you drag the highlighted "render MathJax" to your bookmark bar?

@Skullpatrol Don't drag the link to that page, but the link that is on that page. The underlined "render MathJax"

@anon CMacTeX is nice for producing PDFs, but it is not interactive. MathJax inside BBEdit is :-)

I don't use Mac anyway.

@anon I assume that MikTeX is somewhat interactive?

Not sure what you mean. You have the LaTeX source in one window and a PDF preview inside another window, pressing a green > button updates the preview.

@Skullpatrol Did you get the proper link in your bookmark bar?

@anon That would be interactivity :-)

@anon CMacTeX processes LaTeX source, produces .dvi then you can convert that to .ps or .pdf

But you don't get an instant preview.

Bah, that sounds annoying. That's why I quit learning LaTeXing documents the first time I tried IIRC.

MikTeX sounds a bit more user-friendly, being interactive.

I don't think it was around when I started TeXing.

you have to create a new bookmark then edit it

paste in the javascript thing I was pointing at earlier

paste it where?

hold the click button on the link in your browser (don't let go of the click button), then drag it into the bookmarks toolbar. (I might be behind on the convo)

@Skullpatrol Ah, Firefox lets you drag a link to the bookmark bar. I think IE does, too. Did you try to edit an existing bookmark and inserting the code?

@anon Then again, I think you are right on time :-)

@anon: are you using Chrome?

atm no, ff

I have trouble helping people using Chrome, since I don't have it installed.

this computer has chrome too. should I experiment?

@robjohn IE freezes up when I come to this site

well, chromium anyway

any statisticans here ?

@Skullpatrol That's not good.

@anon If you don't mind. See if there are extra steps needed to install the bookmark under Chrome.

@robjohn I have no choice, but to use Chrome.

nope, same thing. just drag it up. (I dragged it into the home button for fun)

@anon especially check if you can simply drag the bookmark on this page to the bookmark bar.

@anon Good!

I don't know what Skullpatrol's problem is. It must be user error :-)

@Skullpatrol: any luck yet with Chrome?

@robjohn I HATE COMPUTERS!!!

yep, probably user error :-)

@Skullpatrol: paste this into your URL bar and hit enter

@Skullpatrol I can't help with your hate issues. However, anon says that in Chrome, you should be able to click, hold, drag the "render MathJax" link on the page to your bookmark bar.

chromium, technically.

@anon So you are not using Google Chrome?

alo alo!

javascript: alert("hello world")

Or try this: right click the link and click "copy link location" then create a new bookmark and paste into the url box, click ok...

I think I'll take a break an let my hate issues settle down.

@robjohn: No, like I said, it's chromium.

@Skullpatrol do it

just do this first

@anon Okay. I was just verifying. So I cannot tell people that we have tested doing this under Chrome. We'll see if QED can get Skullpatrol through this.

@Skullpatrol, what happened when you did that?

@mixedmath ¡hola!

@QED I went to a Bing search on " javascript: alert("hello world") "

ok

anybody heading off the the joint meetings?

@mixedmath do they serve fun brownies at the joint meetings?

hmm, probably not

ba dumm tss

@mixedmath then probably not :-)

;p

@anon thanks for the rimshot (at least someone was awake).

I was going to make a joke until I realized a second later your comment was a joke..

Phew, what a dull day (for me) at MSE.

Hi guys

hello

hiya

Did you all have better luck?

no

@Srivatsan Dull day?! I got 12 votes for a pretty easy answer. that sounds pretty good to me :-)

Of course, that was pretty much all I did :-p

@robjohn Good for you. Make that 13 now.

@Srivatsan Yee Haw! $\stackrel{\circ\ \circ}{\smile}$

@Srivatsan: was the rest of your day better than your MSE day?

@robjohn Was ok. Not too bad :)

@robjohn WOW IT WORKS!!! I can see your smiley face for the first time ... long live "render MathJax"

T_T

@Srivatsan: I think I will dig out "Trading Places" and watch that. It takes place between Thanksgiving and New Years. Part is in Philadelphia.

@Skullpatrol Huzzah!!

@robjohn what is this?

@Srivatsan what is what?

BTW Anyone looked at this inequality question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/92728?

@QED And thank you QED

@robjohn "Trading places"

@QED: Yes, thank you for getting that done!

@anon and anon you were a GREAT help

np

@Srivatsan A movie starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Akroyd

@robjohn snobbish investor, Eddie Murphy, ... No thanks. =)

@Srivatsan It is a funny movie. I first saw it when I was in grad school.

@robjohn Um. I don't like funny movies. Mainly because I don't really understand parts of the dialogue =)

Action movies are the best; one can really tune off your mind and ears. :/

@Srivatsan Oh, sorry about that.

@robjohn I am half-kidding. :-)

@Srivatsan Which half were you kidding about ? the mind or the ears??

@Skullpatrol well, he has both ears...

@robjohn And half a mind? Thanks... =)

@Srivatsan :-D precisely

@Srivatsan Good answer

perhaps no mind. I am not able to decide...

@Srivatsan As they say "A mind is a terrible thing to waste"

I am so bored, I am thinking of typing up that AM-GM-HM question. I also want to think a bit more about it. But I should say it seems hopeless to me. [As in, I don't have hopes of solving it myself...]

@Srivatsan It should make a good question.

@robjohn Um. I cannot yet decide what the question is. :)

@Srivatsan well, it sounded interesting the other day. I was thinking that with more means, a nice relation ship might occur, such as occurs in $\mathbb{R}^2$

OK. Let me make it precise. Let's say $G_n$ is the region consisting of all $(AM, GM, HM)$ triples for $n$ numbers. Actually, there are only 2 interesting coordinates, so consider $\widetilde G_n$ to be $(\frac{GM}{AM}, \frac{HM}{AM})$ -- this will fit into (lower half of the) the unit square.

I want to ask these questions:

3. This is slightly surprising to me. See if you have any ideas about this. Is it true that $G_n$ is monotonic? That is, $G_n \subseteq G_{n+1}$? [What is clear is that $G_n \subseteq G_{kn}$ for any integer $k$. This seems to be good evidence for monotonicity, but I don't have any ideas there... :)]

Whatever I have written, does this make sense?

@robjohn So, my question (2.) is a way to formalise "hey, can you give me some tight bounds?" I really want to ask for bounds, but that might come across as too vague. =)

I guess there's a way to ask for bounds precisely. I will write it up in the question :-)

OK, enough of this. I will post the question. See you in some time...

mathoverflow.net/questions/83880/…

isn't this very easy?

maybe not

@QED so $a$ and $b$ are either Gaussian or Eisenstein integers?

and $x$, $y$, and $c$ are rational integers?

Ah, $c$ is either Gaussian or Eisenstein

robjohn, What software do you use to generate plots? I am plotting an inequality... If needed, I can even get a function, but I prefer not to... :)

@QED So it should reduce to a pair of Bezout equations if I am reading correctly

@Srivatsan I use Intaglio and Mathematica

depending on the graphic needed.

Hi all

@tb hello!

@tb just in time for me to head to the park :-)

@robjohn Great :( Have fun walking the dog!

@tb I will. It rained a bit ago, so I am hoping we don't get wet.

We're having snow around here for the first time this winter. I'm sure your dog would like it :)

@tb: I'll be back in about an hour, but then we eat dinner, so I may not be responsive. I got an unexpected windfall today on a question that I thought would only be of minor interest.

@tb She's seen snow in Mammoth Lakes. She didn't seem to care.

@robjohn I'll have a look at your windfall question. I'll probably stick around for a while. See you later, then!

@tb: thanks. I think that special-functions might be applicable

@robjohn Thanks again for the help with the MathJax sir

@robjohn I've added the tag. People like Riemann Zeta and Gamma, apparently :) Good for you!

@QED Thanks again for your help Quod Erat Demonstrandum with the MathJax

bye

Can't I get anything right? =/

@Srivatsan What's up?

I give up

@tb Yesterday, I gave you an inequality, right? Turns out it's wrong. (What a surprise!) I now did everything "correctly"; on plotting I get an empty plot.. =)

What's the function?

I mean the corrected one?

@tb No, don't bother. I manually computed the feasible point where the function ought to be positive, but it comes to be negative. =)

There's definitely something wrong with the expression :)

Any hint would be appreciated for Gram determinant identity

And hello! :)

@robjohn, sorry, missed your reply because I was away. That sounds good!

any statistician here ?

I am giving up for now (see my past comments for context) =)

Heh "Can't afford one of the big three M's? Switch to Sage." =)

Do you know anyone who uses this "proof wiki"? It seems so disconnected and elementary to me...

My friends tend to have good taste...

Further, many proofs are easy given the theory developed till that point. It seems pointless to include such proofs. Of course, some big theorems have proofs that contain a nontrivial new idea. But in cursory glance, that's not what I found in that site...

I don't know. I never found anything actually useful there, but I didn't try very hard. The few things I looked at were either not self-contained or distinctly inelegant.

So I don't know who the intended audience actually is.

@tb I guess storing your proofs (or writing and checking your proof) counts as a use for that site. =)

[half-kidding.]

Hah, that's enough cat-skinning for now. I still haven't figured out how to properly write a short essay for a few other questions...

Hey, J.M.

Hey t.b. :)

@tb: This post is somewhat relevant to our discussion few days back: math.stackexchange.com/q/85955/13425

I couldn't stand reading this question, we've got enough snow outside....

@JM hi JM. What question were you talking about?

@Srivatsan Hey Sri. This one.

The other questions, well... the answers will just pop up when my essays are ready. :)

@Srivatsan Thanks. I should check out one or the other of the sources Michael mentions.

I was wondering if it is appropriate introduce a tag (Lp-spaces). There are so many questions on those, and it might be worth it. What do you guys think?

I'd not hesitate if there's more than ten of them...

Since there's no scope for confusion (like the "algebra" one), I am ok with it.

I think I myself answered more than ten of them.

On that note, I think some of the stochastics questions could use a "martingales" tag...

I have a general doubt about tag management. I know there is no real hierarchy of tags, but does that mean that I should all the relevant tags in the hierarchy; e.g., some question might fit all of integration, Lp spaces, functional analysis tags. // The example is not that well-thought out.

I'm not seeing the downside in your example...

@JM Well, no real downside. The only, if any, is that I find it odd to add calculus tag if there's already a limit tag, since limit $\subseteq$ calculus. But for the purposes of organisation and searching, the calculus tag is important too, I guess.

One thing I don't like about the tag lp-spaces is that lp could be mistaken for linear programming (and we know that people don't bother to read the tag wiki excerpt). Then again, people use Lebesgue spaces for them (which is ridiculous because they are due to Riesz) and Lebesgue spaces, in turn, is not descriptive at all because it is again ambiguous.

@tb Will "Lp-spaces" be confused with linear programming? Lp will definitely be.

When Andrew Wiles proved Fermat, it is said at first he "disguised" it in lecture. How does one "disguise" a problem actually? Any intuition behind simple problem examples.

@ZeeshanMahmud Well, not everybody knows the connection between modular functions, elliptic curves, and Fermat.

@Srivatsan I'm not sure. Just a thought

@tb But I'm sure the infinite monkey theorem will have some implication here... =)

@tb Hmm, yes, that might create more work for retaggers like us...

@Zeeshan: Go read any popular account of the story of FLT, e.g. Simon Singh.

@ZhenLin I did, hence the question

Then what's unclear about it? Even the connection between the modularity conjecture and FLT is a non-trivial result.

The average graduate student of the time was not likely to know.

@ZhenLin I meant "a" problem. Not that problem.

@Zhen: may I ask you to take a quick glance at this? Am I missing an obvious trick here, because the argument I give is distinctly cumbersome...

@ZhenLin The connection was Ribet's, no?

Frey, I'd say.

@JM The epsilon conjecture?

@ZhenLin Yeah.

@JM Out of curiosity, do you know about this stuff? Where did you pick it up?

@Srivatsan I still haven't entirely read that paper by Wiles, FYI. ;) I got interested in elliptic functions even before I found out about Fermat.

@tb The notation is unfamiliar...

@JM Um, ok. :)

@ZhenLin what would you choose, then?

Let me rephrase: what would be familiar notation?

Well, if $[X, Y]$ is just an ordinary exponential I can live with that.

@JM, re your Stefan-Boltzmann comment, how does the exponential function (even worse, the $e^x-1$ in the denominator) creep into it?

@ZeeshanMahmud I think this is the proper answer to your question: work on the most general conjecture you can muster, whose special cases are way more popular than the conjecture you have proven. See Perelman, for instance.

@JM Just so that you can fool the students into checking your proof. =)

[Or at least listen to it in a lecture.]

@J.M My motivation was because I see many seemingly innocuous problems in SE. So it made me wonder if they are indeed "disguised" version of famous problem. For instance This.

@ZhenLin yes, it is. I'm sure there is good notation for passing from a morphism $f \in \operatorname{Hom}{(X,[Y,Z])}$ to the corresponding morphism in $\operatorname{Hom}{(X \times Y, Z)}$, but I couldn't remember.

@Srivatsan Planck's law. You know, that thing that triggered the whole quantum business...

So I decided to go with $\tilde{f}$.

@JM Ew, why does that law postulate that expression?

Sorry, JM. It's like my physics is slowly dissipating... I don't remember seeing such an expression before ;)

Because it worked when Rayleigh-Jeans didn't, that's why. ;)

Can I tell a lame joke? Please. :)

@ZeeshanMahmud As long as we're not required to laugh, sure. :)

I fear the worst ... :)

I think Srivatsan was referring to Plancking when meant "that expression"

@tb: I'm afraid I don't see any obvious way to do it. Actually, I'm having trouble seeing what to do with the $[K, X]$ factor of the fibre product...

@tb What a keen foresight =)

@Sri: If you're going to ask me how Planck imagined that, I have no idea; I haven't gotten around to reading his original paper (so many things to learn, so little time... :D ).

But anyway, lunch now...

@JM Well, I was hoping for a grandpa-story on that. Too bad...

But the important thing was that the theory agreed well with experimental observations. Too well.

@ZhenLin Okay, thanks! I was playing around quite a bit, but I couldn't come up with anything more elegant. At least I understand now why they didn't spell it out...

Enjoy your lunch!

...and people started looking for stuff to quantize ever since.

Um, ok. It's kind of fuzzy to me. Anyway.

nomen est omen?

Having ideas is so easy

@tb I noticed it, but didn't want to comment.

@DylanMoreland especially if the idea is not going to be good anyway. =)

[just kidding]

Well, I'm not sure that you should be.

I'm sure Mike Jones will like that question. One could go a step further and require that all papers are translated to Esperanto.

@DylanMoreland Sorry, I didn't catch your comment. Does it say I shouldn't be kidding (about this point)?

@Srivatsan In the sense that I think this question is truly silly.

@tb But only the results. So it's easy.

@DylanMoreland Indeed. Executing them in a way that pays off is a different kettle of fish, however.

Are there any algebraic geometers in the house?

Bye, all.

Bye, @Srivatsan

I don't get what is so cool about algebraic geometry. Could someone explain to me the point of all the schemes and sheafs and divisors and forms and categories?

What elegant things does one get?

Try reading some of the suggestions here before starting with schemes and stuff. The point is that at some point you need a concise, efficient and precise language, and that's what sheaf theory and category theory provide.

Woah, I'm not trying to learn that stuff just yet. I'm currently beginning Miranda's book on Riemann Surfaces, which is essentially "Algebraic Geometry: Middle school edition" and I was wonder where it all leads.

Like, why, viscerally, should I care about such things?

Because polynomials are everywhere and projective geometry is beautiful? I don't know how to answer this question.

What is beautiful about projective geometry?

Can anyone tell me if i am unsure whether the answer is not simplified, would it be wise to check the community wiki?

It's really your call.

Okay.

What morrow top you not, and of to the...

@AsafKaragila Not you, and of morrow's top to the what...

It's uncanny that I'm still below the 20k... :-P

@AsafKaragila Well, that's what pickiness gets you. ;)

@JM I don't think it's pickiness as much as it is not being adequate enough to answer other forms of questions ;-)

I think that it took me less time to gain 8k of reputation, but still not much progress on that Generalist badge. :-D

Look at me, I'm picky; which explains a lot of my dry days. Getting 500 rep was only due to Beni's kindness.

I don't get why Jonas Meyer put bounty of 500 points on that answer.

I think he secretly hates reputation.

@AsafKaragila Likely; he's put more than one 500-rep bounty over the past few months...

Actually, however, I would say none of us really need more than 20k anyway... ;)

Tell that to Arturo ;-)

I'm currently earmarking extra rep just in case I see an answer so good, that a bounty is a good way to thank the answerer.

:-)

I think I should edit some tag wikis.

Before the opportunity to gain 2 points from those ;-)

Sounds like a good plan. I'll check them over in the review panel.

This way I could get to 19,999 and trigger the recalc for that missing point (which I have due to a deleted downvote)

:P

I just went over the list of all tags... some of them are just "wtf..."

e.g.?

famous-theorems

It's like someone really wanted a Taxonomist badge there :-D

Eww... I'd delete, but maybe take it to that long thread to be sure?

I rewrote the excerpt on AC

@JM but if you delete you'll bump that darn Hamlet-thingie again!

@tb We should invoke a double-diamond deletion of the tag.

@tb Good point. Where's Willie when you need him...

For months now single-diamonds can't delete tags.

I added an excerpt to fake-proofs

Now five more votes and I trigger the recalc :-D

@Asaf: I reworded your excerpt slightly (it was too long :P ). Please check that I didn't FUBAR your writing.

@JM Looks fine.

I'd have added "but before you post your question, please make sure that you don't divide by zero anywhere in the argument"

The point where people read the excerpt it's too late for that... :\

I shouldn't have answered this "how to propose a conjecture"-thing by Rajesh. Nothing but trouble with that darn thread.

Have you ever received something like this as MSE top users?

No. I don't think there was a clear consensus for the swag, except that this site is mostly populated by algebraists.

@tb You got new comments?

@JM Yeah, Alex B. complained that I misrepresented Serre. Well, he's perfectly right, but I'm too lazy to correct that at the moment.

Morning hit squad.

Hit here : )

@Gigili I have received a Klein bottle with the sticker "math.SE swag inside the bottle!"

@Matt Morning, Matt. Still no hit squad. Asaf's slooow

@Gigili well spotted : )

@tb I've voted already... I was in the midst of making a joke!

@Matt Hihi.

I was actually hoping for a shirt, but apparently people prefer notepads that leave you feeling empty when you've used them all... :D

Cute, look Gigli's avatar has Santa hats : D

@JM I wanted a low ball, or a tumbler.

I could use a thermochromic mug myself... :D

Well, there are these two threads on swag. But if I should happen receive a thing with $1+2+3+4 + \cdots = -\frac{1}{12}$ I will forget about all my environmentalist activities in the past and throw it out of my window.

How can there be 4 of us and only 3 close votes?

@Matt Someone didn't vote :-P

@Matt : P

Now if you don't vote Santa won't bring you present.

We don't have Santa... but I voted anyway.

: )

Hehe, the Santa thing seems to have done the trick.

Yeah, I was slow because I was composing my rant about Riemann Zeta nonsense

And you blamed me? Jerk! :-)

@tb Of course. And you're not scared of Santa.

Exactly :)

I'd really rather see a picture than a formula on math swag. At the very least, you can mumble something about it being modern art if asked... ;)

@JM Apollonian gaskets are cool.

I'd like a Klein bottle with a print of Koch's snowflake in an accurate representation.

@AsafKaragila Users deserve the best swag package on MSE , each answer here equals five answers on the other SE sites, in sense of the effort they put into the answers. Something better than a klein bottle actually.

@AsafKaragila : D

@AsafKaragila Any of the circles-within-circles pictures are cool, actually.

@JM I can go for Sierpinski's triangle too.

I wonder how long the "grown-ups" are going to continue this nonsense thread on meta

I stopped following that.

@AsafKaragila I think the tetrix easily outdoes that. ;)

@JM 3D stuff is overrated.

@tb Bejuzus... it's a gorram quote; quote it verbatim!