I guess you could use the fact that the polynomials of degree $\le n$ form a vector space of dimension $n+1$. But you'd need to know about the vanderMonde determinant.
I told you that I had two people from Athens who'd taken our Spivak course go to UC. One (a woman) switched out of math within a quarter. The other (a guy) did finish a math major but wasn't very happy; switched to a Ph.D. in philosophy. (Of course, his dad did the exact same thing.)
I remember Andre asked me why there were so many brazilian undergrads in math here and he just paused and asked "Are they all crazy rich or something?"
I honestly don't know how most universities/colleges evaluate foreign students for college. There aren't AP courses/exams abroad, for example.
Lucas, Berkeley is super competitive. It's one of the top 5 colleges in the country. So you are competing against people who have all 10s. Give yourself broader options.
The only exception I know of in the US are engineering majors. Even at some generally liberal arts schools like Duke, engineering majors take something like 28 of 34 courses in engineering-related courses, so thats engineering plus natural and computer sciences.
Last night dream involved some intense stuff related to path integrals where part of the integrand is the Thomae function. I need to check whether this function is injective and thus whether it has an inverse function
I was just arguing that, unlike Europe where people do almost all math, in the US a math major typically takes relatively less math than everything else.
@Lucas so at an american university course schedules are typically pretty open, you typically would be required to take stuff that isn't math (general education)
@TedShifrin You can tell in my diff top course. Ask us to do a slightly abstract problem like the one Im still pondering that I asked you and the math grad students blow me out of the water. Ask us to do a computation in local coordinates and I race past most of them suddenly.
As you know, @Kevin, I'm a big believer in computing (just ask Eric). My students learned to do both.
@Kevin: Your problem is not having done any proof-based mathematics in forever. Theoretical linear algebra, multivariable analysis ... all that stuff is a serious prereq.
well the last happened when i was asking him pde questions in his office when i was going down a quasiconformal mappings rabbithole and he told me the story of how rand paul was at a ranch that he happened to be at and apparently he's a huge asshole
meh the revolution thingy is a cliche now. multiple ""revolution"" happened during the past century and they have failed miserably to bring any form of socialism or anything closer
perhaps you mean a sociological revolution or an economical one than a politically motivated one though
@Daminark i think that ive actually been really successful just asking profs for shit, it helps that a lot of the analysts here in particular really seem to wanna educate us young folks
Like he feels like he'll just be all "Lol no" and correct you. Schlag feels like he'll just internally facepalm. Though Benson keeps bouncing right up in your face when he talks and that's a bit scary
Not scary as much as it's just like, don't crash into me plex
@EricSilva well, that's true. i think i can come up with only one or two examples where neoliberalism definitely have had positive impacts on occasions (eg Deng's China).
Can I ask a small group theory question?: the Cantor-Schroeder-Bernstein theorem doesn't hold in the category of groups, and I think I found a counterexample: $G = \bigoplus_{i\geq 1} \mathbb{Z}_{2^i}$ and $H = \bigoplus_{i\geq 2}\mathbb{Z}_{2^i}$, and I feel both are non-isomorphic, maybe because of some divisibility argument, but I'm not sure.
Hey guys - I've been looking around the stuff that I'll be studying for a lecture about analysis on manifolds, just to get a basic idea about the things. Besides my whole confusion around using tensors to define stuff on manifolds, there's one thing I don't really even see the motivation for - there's a whole chapter on integration on riemann and pseudo-riemann manifolds, and a specific mention of there being a notion of volume on those types of manifolds - why is that?
It seems to me like there's a good definition of integration on general manifolds, and I would expect that gives us "volume" too, so I'm sure I'm missing something. Why does integration on general manifolds not necessarily give us a correct notion on volume of a manifold?
@John you can integrate a top dimensional form on a smooth manifold, and those things are called volume forms, but they're not unique or canonical, there really isn't a natural choice unless you have a richer structure. On a (pseudo) Riemannian manifold you have a natural pick, so that's why you kind of set it apart.
The problem itself is to calculate some kind of interactions which need to take account of all Hamiltonian densities for all possible pathways the interaction can occur, thus a path integral then become ranged over some uncountable set