« first day (2061 days earlier)      last day (3255 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

00:00
It seems so powerful, I thought I'd need to justify it some more.
Well, it's not easy to show that singletons are open.
But yes, the moment you know that, you're finished.
I thought that you just define the minimum distance between $x$ and any other point (say $r(x)$), consider any point other than $x$ in the open ball $\mathbb{B}_d(x,r(x))$ and end up finding that $\{x\}$ is the ball that's open in the underlying metric.
Is that a viable approach, @MikeMiller?
I mean, it works for finite metric spaces, yes. That is a rather restrictive class of spaces. :)
00:58
Took me 20 minutes to figure out the inequality I was trying to prove was an instantiation of the triangle inequality.
I feel your pain, @MikeMiller!
Took me an hour to realise that $a + \beta(b-a)$ was the same as $(1-\beta)a + \beta b$ in a parameterisation. :-)
That being said, I'm out. Thanks for your help today/yesterday!
01:29
In unit groups why does $(R \times S)^{\times} = R^{\times} \times S^{\times}$?
user147690
You are asking about why are the units of this cartesian product, equal to the cartesian product of the units?
user147690
Well the operation of multiplication here is $(a,b)(c,d)=(ac,bd)$ right?
user147690
So we only care about 'contact' between R and itself, and S and itself right?
user147690
So then, an element $(r,s)$ is invertible precisely when $r$ and $s$ are invertible simultaneously
01:39
Makes sense, cheers.
02:04
i think i ate too much chocolate
i have chocolate poisoning
but the cookies were so good
02:28
@ForeverMozart what's chocolate poisoning? never heard of it.
it is possible
like dogs are very sensitive to it
even a little bit can kill a dog
@MikeMiller I have always assumed you look like David Bowie due to that being your blog photo. I'd be disappointing otherwise, so I'm not going to look for that talk :D
@ForeverMozart Ah yes I have heard of it, but for cats, not dogs.
where is his blog?
i have forgotten the name of the blog. i think it was assorted details following or some such
The only person visible is the speaker.
Also it's past your bedtime.
02:38
I know. I kept awake so late that I thought I might as well finish my breakfast. Now I'm going to sleep!
Weird kid.
I thought I had a proof but there is a hole in it
:( so depressing
03:22
Hey all, looking for some help... I am having trouble showing that $\pi \notin \mathbb{Q}(\pi^3)$. Any tips?
Toss a fair coin between two people. If it end with HHT, A wins the game. If it ends with HTT, B wins the game. Whats the probability of A wining the game.
Can someone help me
user147690
As a combination or permutation @JesterTran
user147690
And what about TTT?
@AlexClark Permutation because order is important?
@AlexClark Are you clarifying or quizzing me?
user147690
@JesterTran That's what I am asking. Also, when you say end, do you mean they can flip it 11 times, and it ends on HHT
user147690
03:25
Clarifying
@AlexClark Yes
I know the numerical answer but do not know the reason behind it
user147690
Is it .5?
@AlexClark Sorry, it's not
user147690
For how many flips?
user147690
Arbitrarily many more than or equal to 3?
03:28
@AlexClark If it 3 flips, then answer is clearly 1/4. So I guess more than 3 flips
user147690
Oh oops, yes of course
I just checked 4 flips
tree diagram
2^4 outcomes
4 of which I think make A win
HHHT, HHTH, HHTT, THHT
user147690
@JesterTran Why do the middle two make A win?
user147690
You said end, and you said permutation
@AlexClark Sorry, I misunderstood question
user147690
03:35
You are saying HHTH and HHTT make A win?
so only HHHT and THHT work
yep
user147690
How does A win HHTH and HHTT?
@AlexClark It doesn't, sorry
made an error
By induction: probability is 1/2^2 + 1/2^3 + 1/2^4 + ... = 1/2
Lol, btw, the answer is 2/3: glassdoor.com.au/Interview/…
03:49
welcome back @AlexClark
user147690
Thanks @MikeMiller, I got some work done in my away time :P
user147690
Hi
user147690
Visiting my parents, using this garbage buggy windows 10 atm
this strikes me as a very silly question: math.stackexchange.com/q/1713839/137524
user147690
03:53
What are you working on these days @MikeMiller
3 rolls: HHT occurs at the once (sample space 2^3)
4 rolls: XHHT occurs 2 times since X can be H/T (sample space 2^4)
5 rolls: XXHHT occurs 2^2 times since X can be H/T (sample space 2^5)
...
Hence total probability is 1/2^3 + 2/2^4 + 2^2/2^5 + ...
which is 1/2^3 + 1/2^3 + ...
you're inducting too quickly. check the 6 roll case.
@Semiclassical 6 rolls: XXXHHT occurs 2^3 times since X can be H/T (sample space 2^6)
hence probability is (2^3)/(2^6) = 1/2^3
What I am missing?
including if XXX=HTT?
@Semiclassical Are you saying the game terminates early OR did I miss that particular case?
03:59
i'm saying that that combination can't come up because $B$ would've won already.
nor can HHT show up, since $A$ would've won already.
@Semiclassical As I thought
it's easy enough to drop those two cases from the 6-roll case, but i imagine that it makes the higher cases a good deal more complicated
nor do i see an obvious pattern to the counting in those first few cases (1,2,4,6,...)
3 rolls: 1 occurrence of HHT
4 rolls: HHT (1 occurence), XHHT (2 occurence)
5 rolls: HHT (1 occurence), XHHT (2 occurence), XXHHT (3occurence)
....
@AlexClark: Writing a lecture for Thursday.
user147690
@MikeMiller A once off lecture, or weekly installments?
04:05
probability is
1/(2^3) + (1+2)/(2^4) + (1+2+3)/(2^5) + ....
plugging that sum into mathematica, i get it equaling 1
which i think you'd agree isn't very sensible.
wait
I made error with occurences lol
XXHHT should be 2^2 occurences
right. but then as noted above, XXXHHT has only 2^3-2=6 occurences
probability now should be:
1/(2^3) + (1+2)/(2^4) + (1+2+2^2)/(2^5) + ...
right... forgot to subtarct duplicates
i'm not sure how best to do that in a systematic way, tbh. i don't know what the n=7 case would look like, for instance
04:11
wait, can we re-examine lower cases
you mean, reuse that information? sure.
4 rolls: HHT (1 occurrence), XHHT (2occurrence - 1 occurence) which is essentially the same as finding the occurrence of XHHT alone?
4 rolls, how would YOU compute the probability of A winning?
i'm not the one doing the problem. but you've already written down the answer to that one by tabulation.
04:14
4 rolls: HHT (1 occurence), XHHT (2 occurence)
That seems reasonable
@Semiclassical this made me confused
sure. for the low rolls, counting it out is fine.
it's just that you have to count more and more carefully as you get past the first few, and that gets impractical.
not that i see the alternative, but presumably there is one if one thinks through it
@Semiclassical what do you count carefully? it's the same pattern overall. why is there an anomaly after a certain number?
because you only have to worry about the game having ended early if you've played more than five rounds. otherwise the simple counting works.
that the first few terms are matched by one pattern is no guarantee that it always works.
@Semiclassical 6 rolls: HHT (count = 1), XHHT (count = 2), XXHHT (count = 2^2), XXXHHT (count = 2^3), what is wrong with this?
double counting, I guess
or excessive counting
extra counting, sure
i think the way to view it is perhaps: look at the X...X part, and consider in how many ways the game could have ended during that portion. that's the number you'll need to remove.
i think that should allow you to reduce it to a recurrence relation
04:24
3 rolls: HHT (count = 1)
4 rolls: XHHT (count = 2)
5 rolls: XXHHT (count = 2^2)
6 rolls: XXXHHT (count = 2^3 - 1)
7 rolls: XXXXHHT (count = 2^4 - 2)
look back at the six roll case. you need to include the possibility that either opponent has already won.
@Alex: I'm TAing algebraic topology, so once a week. I'm not planning out the whole thing right now but writing notes for the first lecture.
Consider the general toss: XX...XHHT (with n X's). HHT can occur within those X's (n-2) times. Same with HTT.
Hence we have 2^n - 2(n-2) = 2^n - 2n + 4 which is the count for the occurrences in which A will win
i'm not entirely sure that works, though it may. i'd suggest testing it on the 9-roll case to be sure.
04:34
@Semiclassical 9 roll: (XXXXXX)HHT. Within those X's, HHT can occur 4 times, same with HTT. Total is 2^6
Testing formula: 2^6 - 2(6) + 4 = 2^6 - 8 which is true
total for 9 roll is 2^6 - 4 - 4
hmm. my reasoning would go like so, let's see if it gets the same count
before, we agreed that in six rolls, there were 2^3-2=6 ways for the game to have finished with A the victor
which is 2^3 - 2(3) + 4 = 2^3 - 2 = 6
(satisfying formula)
which means that there were also 6 ways for B to have won in the same number of rolls
so from 2^6=64 one should remove 2*6=12 ways, leaving 52.
which differs from yours by 4.
i'm not entirely convinced i'm right, though, mostly because if i work out my reasoning in mathematica i get a nonsense answer for the total probability
Somehow, this can be done mentally
04:51
Hello everyone.
This question is still unanswered, and there is still a 50 point bounty on it:
2
Q: Use Cauchy Inequalities to find an upper bound for $|f^4(i)|$ and $|f^4(0)|$

K.M.Let's suppose that $f$ is differentiable on a disk $B_{10}(r)$, and $|f(z)| \leq 54$ for $z$ on the circle $|z-i| = 3$. My goal is to use Cauchy Inequalities to find an upper bound for $|f^4(i)|$ and $|f^4(0)|$. The first of these is simply a direct application of the Cauchy Inequality formula. ...

@robjohn, you always give amazing answers. Would you like to take a stab at it?
Thanks guys :)
@Semiclassical Hm 9 roll, what are the 12 counts you are removing?
well, we showed there are six ways for A to win in six rolls. we didn't count it, but by symmetry i'd presume the same is true for B.
so that would mean removing six twice for a total of 12.
@Semiclassical but we want to remove the count of B winning within the X's
yes, hence the factor of two (6+6)
this is 9-roll: XXXXXXHHT, there are only 4 possibilities that B wins within the X's
same with A
05:00
that doesn't agree with your count of six rolls from earlier.
there, you ended up with 6 possible ways for A to have won within six rolls.
i think i'm not excluding enough myself, though.
I've lost focus, lol
actually, yeah, my duplicate count is definitely under-counting. it misses all cases with HHTXXXHHT, for instance, because those wouldn't show up in the six-roll case either.
right now, i doubt either of us have the right number for the nine-roll case.
in any case, i'm tired of counting. later.
WAIT!
I need to thank you for your input
glad i could be of help, then.
Prob(HHT) * 0.5 = Prob(HTT), Prob(HHT) + Prob(HTT) = 1, ===> Prob(HHT)=2/3
What do you think of this?
I'm baffled by the second premise
does it even make sense or is rubbish?
05:07
isn't that just a statement of total probability? i.e. one player eventually wins
or at least, the probability of any game lasting at least n rounds presumably goes to zero as $n\to\infty$
what i'm not seeing is how the first equality could be true.
suppose HHT occurs
then there is 0.5 chance to get a T
which would yield HHTT
but isn't the game already over once you've hit HHT?
not really an opportunity for another roll to occur if A has already won.
@Semiclassical lol, I'm done
05:10
same, heh.
thanks again for the help ^_^
06:03
hey
@Semiclassical
@EricStucky would you like to check something for me please ?
for sanity check purposes?
I was stuck on something that is super stupid !_!
omfg
06:28
@Adeek what is it?
 
3 hours later…
09:35
@rorty Assume $\pi \in \Bbb Q(\pi^3)$. Then $\pi = \sum_i a_i (\pi^3)^i$. This is a polynomial on $\pi$ with coefficients in $\Bbb Q$. Now recall $\pi$ is a transcendental.
09:49
@BalarkaSen Does this require p-adic numbers? You expressing Pi as a sum reminds me of it
No this has nothing whatsoever to do with p-adic numbers.
So how did you write Pi as a sum?
By hypothesis, elements of $\Bbb Q(\pi^3)$ are a linear combination of the elements of the form $(\pi^3)^i$. If $\pi$ is in this field, it can be written as a linear combination.
@BalarkaSen oh right, yeh. Thanks
 
1 hour later…
10:55
Would I be correct in saying that a topology $\mathcal{T}$ is a collection of open sets (that satisfy the usual properties) and that closed sets aren't elements of $\mathcal{T}$. Rather, if we specify all the closed sets of a set $X$, it's enough to take their complements to form a topology on $X$?
Sure. A topology consists of open sets, not closed sets. Although if you have the open sets, you can take complement to get the closed sets and vice versa.
Wicked! For a while, my notes were unclear so I was under the impression that there's another $\mathcal{T}$ just for closed sets. Thanks, @BalarkaSen!
@Kari You're ephemeral, aren't you?
I can't keep track of the usernames anymore.
Yep! Who was formerly @Khallil!
I thought I'd mix it up a bit :-)
@Kari "mix it up" Indeed, it has been made into quite a curry. I mean, kari.
11:00
Hahahahaha!
Do you know where the name Kari is from?
Nope, I have no idea!
Where's it from?
Have you heard of an anime called Digimon?
Of course. I used to watch it when I was 5 or so.
She's one of the younger characters in the main group that ventures the digital word in order to save it from the evil clutches of Myotismon!
Ah, I see. And now I understand what your avatar is about. It's one of those digimon cellphones.
@Kari There were so many digimons and so many characters in each season that I forgot about them.
11:03
Nope, it's a cell from another anime called Hunter X Hunter.
Aw. Close enough.
You were referring to a Digivice!
Right, that's the one.
@Kari You're a fan of Japanese animations, aren't you? Have you seen "The Wind Rises"?
Not quite of the genre you like, I guess, but I enjoyed it. Probably one of my favorite animations in general.
I am indeed a fan! I haven't, no! Is it a movie or an anime, @BalarkaSen?
It's a movie.
11:10
I watch pretty much anything!
I strongly recommend it for whoever wants to watch it: I haven't seen anything so beautiful like that.
If we're talking beautiful, Garden of Words is definitely high up on my list.
I imagine it's what an unlimited budget looks like when it comes to animation!
Interesting. I have noted it down.
I'm going to watch The Wind Rises later today!
Thanks for the recommendation! :-)
No problem! Let me know what you think of it.
11:16
(The music isn't from the movie, just mixed in for the purpose of the video!)
@Kari Very nice! Makes me want to watch it too.
Hello@Balarka How are you?
11:40
I'm good, @Albas.
What are you studying?
Currently physics. Planning on finishing the chapter on differentiation in rudin.
@Balarka Have you seen the sixth sense?
Of course :) It's my favorite Shyamalan film.
M night shyamalan is great story teller. You will like this one also I guess. Movie's name is the others
Pretty amazing. I just watched it yesterday
Ah, I have heard of it but haven't seen that one.
I liked Unbreakable and Signs.
Ah. I haven't seen those.
12:03
Hi, anyone active?
12:49
To be proved:
A matrix where its column vectors span a parallelpiped is degenerate (hence det()=0) whenever there exists at least one surface normal to one of the column vectors such that the projection of the corresponding row vector on it is the zero vector
13:09
guys
can I use Matlab online free of cost?
there must be some site
I am desperate as hell because today is the submission date of an assignment that requires Matlab
13:47
RIP me
Above claim disproved. Back to the drawing board!
14:13
Hello!!
14:23
We have that $x^p=y^2=e$, $xy=yx$ and $(xy)^{2p}=e$, where $p$ is a prime. I want to show that the order of $xy$ is $2p$. To do that we have to show that $2p$ is the smallest power of $xy$ so that it is equal to $1$, right?

I have done the following:

Suppose that $2p$ is not the smallest power, then say $n$ is the smallest power such that $(xy)^n=e$. That means that $n\mid 2p \Rightarrow n\mid 2 \text{ or } n\mid p \Rightarrow n\in \{1,2,p\}$.

If $n=1$, then $xy=e\Rightarrow x=y^{−1}=y$. Since the order of $y$ is $2$, we would have that the order $x$ is also $2$. That is true only when $
morning
guys
if you had an exam tomorrow, the 2nd mid-semester basically and you had already performed well in the 1st mid-semester and the best of those 2 would be taken for marking your final grades would you study for the exam?
hi
my book claims "the length of a chord $AB$ of a circle with radius $R$ is equal to $2R\sin{\dfrac{AB}{2}}$"
no?
unless $AB$ subtends $120 \degrees $ onto the center of the circle
oh sorry I just tried randomly guessing the latex for degree
didn't work xD
@SoumyoB I wouldn't study for that exam, because studying for an exam the day before the exam is useless waste of time for me.
14:37
@BalarkaSen I only study before days of exam, don't mean to sound rude but I think the statement "Studying before exams is a waste of time" is a huge cliche and in general not true
Edited.
oh well
is my books claim true?
they say it can be verified by looking at the equilateral triangle $AOB$ where $O$ is the center of the circle but my problem is that $AOB$ is not always equilateral
@SoumyoB: You tried doing otherwise?
That sounds like a statement about inscribed angles. Wiki has a page on that
14:47
@MikeMiller which statement's 'otherwise' are you talking about?
Duration trumps intensity when it comes to studying, I find
@Semiclassical How do we know the angle is $AB/2$?
15:03
Don't know. Just thought that link might be useful.
I'm probably not allowed to fove advice aincd I haven't been tested in years
@Semiclassical It seems they are assuming $AOB$ is equilateral, which doesn't make sense since they say the length of any chord
Is what they are saying false?
the question was dealing with an $n$-sided regular polygon
15:39
Hi @DanielFischer
@DanielFischer Is the following an acceptable definition for an identity of a group: $\exists e \in G$ $\forall a \in G$ such that $e * a = a * e = a$?
@Balarka: Interesting crowd you're hanging with.
@MikeMiller Well, it is quiet here and I'm trying to pluck up the courage to dive into pages of algebra in the proof of finiteness of the projection map (from which Noether normalization follows) which I skipped.
Figured procrastination is the best way to do this.
15:54
Weird.
Shouldn't you be integrating?
Already done some in the morning.
Your procrastination could nail a small confirmation for me @BalarkaSen:
in The h Bar, 21 mins ago, by The Dark Side
So, just wondering if I'm right about this extrapolation of the original discussion. Not the curvature tensor, but if we have some general rank-4 tensor $T_{ijkl}$ in 4D spacetime which is anti-symmetric w.r.t. all four indices, there is only independent component e.g. $T_{1234}$, because e.g. $T_{2134}, T_{1243}$ etc. are all related to it.
I am not procrastinating anymore. Besides, I don't know this curvature tensor stuff.
Dang. :(
The rest of the argument was:
in The h Bar, 20 mins ago, by The Dark Side
i.e. no. of independent components = no. of distinct combinations of 1, 2, 3 and 4, with no repetition allowed since that will kill it (i.e. make it 0).
in The h Bar, 16 mins ago, by The Dark Side
e.g. $T_{1214}$ etc. are all zero, $T_{2134} = - T_{1234}$, $T_{3142} = - T_{1342} = + T_{1324} = - T_{1234}$, so again it is related to 1234 component. This appears to work!
Am I right, guys in the chatroom, minus BalarkaSen?
And as a type that, the 7 $\star$ comment on the right pane strikes me (I'm not a regular here) - exercise your own judgement!
So, nevermind. Thank you guys, and @BalarkaSen.
:)
16:21
Small and quick question on smooth manifolds: are projections $C^\infty$?
@BalarkaSen Thanks, you had the right approach. To be more precise I think you have to write $\pi = f(\pi^3)/g(\pi^3)$ because $\mathbb{Q}(\pi^3)$ requires quotients to be a field.
@rorty You are right. Sorry about that, I for some reason thought it was $\Bbb Q[\pi^3]$.
@Miguelgondu: Projection meaning what more precisely?
@MikeMiller Say you have two smooth manifolds $M$ and $N$, I mean the projections $\pi_1\colon M\times N \to M$ and $\pi_2\colon M\times N \to N$.
A map $f\colon M\to N$ is to be called $C^\infty$ if for every $p$ in its domain one can find charts $(U,\varphi)$ and $(V, \psi)$ around $p$ and $f(p)$ respectively such that $\psi\circ f \circ \varphi^{-1}$ is $C^\infty$ in the usual real way.
Yes, and you should prove it. (What are the charts on the product?)
16:32
OOOH, the product of charts
anyone would like to check my delta complex structure ?
And I have yet another question (that seems to be trivial for everyone), why can we consider smooth charts?, most of the times when we say "let $(U, \varphi)$ be a coordinate system" we treat $\varphi$ as a diffeomorphism.
It's a diffeomorphism by the very definition of a smooth structure on a manifold
Like the entire way we know what a smooth function is on a manifold is using those charts
Thanks, I thought the definition of a smooth manifold only required compatible charts.
Of a smooth structure, I mean.
That is what it requires. You check via the definition of what a smooth map is that a chart is a diffeomorphism, once you've used that chart to define the smooth structure.
16:45
Sure will, thanks, Mike.
16:58
hi
Angular measure is equal to arc length measure if and only if the circumference of the circle is equal to unity?
17:14
hey @MikeMiller can I check something with you ?
because @BalarkaSen doesn't like algebra !_! and I want to see why this gives the wrong homology groups even though it satisfies definition of delta structure ! given in the book
You can try, though my phone is dying.
17:32
$\sigma_1^0 : \Delta^0 \rightarrow RP^2$ \ \ $\sigma_2^0 : \Delta^0 \rightarrow RP^2$
$1 \mapsto [(0,0)]$ $1 \mapsto [(0,0)]$

$\sigma_1^1 : \Delta^1 \rightarrow RP^2$ $\sigma_2^1 : \Delta^1 \rightarrow RP^2$ $\sigma_3^1 : \Delta^1 \rightarrow RP^2$

where the maps are defined as follows:


$\sigma_1^1((t_0,t_1)) = [(0,0)t_0 + (1,0)t_1]$
$ \sigma_2^1((t_0,t_1)) = [(1,1)t_0 + (1,0)t_1]$
$\sigma_3^1((t_0,t_1)) = [(0,0)t_0 + (1,1)t_1]$

$ \sigma_1^2 : \Delta^2 \rightarrow RP^2$ $ \sigma_2^2 : \Delta^2 \rightarrow RP^2$
We can see it satisfies the definition
for example if we restrict $\sigma_1^2$ to face [v0,v1]
we get [(0,0)t_0 + (1,1)t_1]
which is $\sigma_3^1$
That's a lot of TeX... I'm going to have to wait until I get home (~12 hours).
ok sure
Help! I can't see how $F(\sqrt{a+b+2\sqrt{ab}})$ contains $\sqrt{a}$ and $\sqrt{b}$!
 
2 hours later…
19:24
I have a natural transformation with invertible components
how do I show the association which sends each object to the inverse of the component is also a natural transformation
so suppose the first one is from F to G
I want to show the "Inverse" is a transformation from G to F
I got stuck proving it satisfies naturality
nvm, I got it....
OK, now I have to recall what the Nakayama lemma said.
I never got much intuition for that particular result, although I seem to remember doing things with it when I was learning commutative algebra.
19:40
Nobody understands it.
19:52
hi
i need help with this question
looking at the page on the Nakayama lemma, my brain just kind of bounces off of it
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (2061 days earlier)      last day (3255 days later) »