Glad to hear @Daniil and 'ello again.

@MattN That's kinda my starting point here: We don't. We do formal logic with symbols that are not words, and pretending that the symbols stand for words is not going to help students learn formal logic.

@MattN To avoid reproduction, maybe?

Haha. : D

and then there's LaTex...i swear i have a love/hate relationship with it, do i avoid it to say what i want to say sooner, and at a lesser energy cost, or do i invest time and effort for clarity and succintness?

is formal logic devoid of any intrinsic meaning, a self-contained "game"?

Right now I'm having amnesia and déjà vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten something before.

@Gigili my phone number. here, let me give it to you again....

is listening carefully

whispers phone number

Physics test.

if my girlfriend answers, just pretend to be a russian mail-order bride. that works.

Oh sorry, I'm not a good pretender.

well, she'll think you are anyways, so...your call.

@DavidWheeler I'm not in the mood for another fight, but it needs to be said that in general it would be nice for the chatroom if people could self-identify as female without receiving that kind of remarks.

@HenningMakholm I think Gigili likes this one so she probably doesn't mind, so don't worry : )

Besides it's not exactly offensive, it's just play. I think it's called flirting.

@MattN You're wrong.

my apologies if i've offended.

@Gigili Oh sorry, my fault then. But then you could've just told him to bugger off : )

I didn't get offended, I'd flag the message if.

You see, "listening carefully" is like playing along.

i truly mean no disrespect to you, Gigili, and i'm the first to admit i CAN be thoughtless at times.

@MattN But he was just kidding as I was.

@MattN I have full confidence in Gigili's ability to throw an appropriate fit if she thinks one is needed. I was more concerned with how the tone in the chatroom might look to lurkers who are not Gigili.

I was being ironic anyway.

@HenningMakholm Ok.

@HenningMakholm that's true, someone might just pop in here (another woman, for example) and think: eew, that feels creepy

@Gigili That got completely lost. At least for me.

and she might be another emmy noether, and it'd be everyone's loss

@Matt Did anyone ever make sense of Dr Terry Allen's question?

@robjohn Hail to the mean king! Nope, I checked a day after my comment to see whether he had sensified his post but he hadn't so I dropped an axe.

as far as i can tell, you need to do a "dropped D" tuning on a twisted torus to establish a fundamental tone

@MattN Umm, I don't remember being serious here.

@MattN oh, so you missed the great intermediate edit before it was axed?

@DavidWheeler I could make no sense of his statements, but then I haven't read the material he said we should read.

but i haven't been able to calibrate the clock vectors to get an octave established

@DavidWheeler Nice try, but you're making too much sense. Doesn't look genuine.

So it is pretty certain that there are loons in the bin?

@HenningMakholm you slay me, sir. me make sense? what will the neighbors say?

@tb Yes, probably. I searched the post for "binary" and got the two hits I'd got before so I concluded that he had not clarified his definition of "binary thingamajig" and so I closed it.

Am I missing something here?

@robjohn Well, actually I think there's a faint possibility to make sense of saying that a given musical configurations (whatever that actually is) forms a semi-algebraic set (why shouldn't they? They are essentially determined by things having rational ratios and finitely many constraints). On the other hand, his farewell (10k+) wasn't too sympathetic...

Page not found.

It's deleted.

@tb OMG I had not looked at the edits. I see that what I saw in the question was just his parting shot.

there's all kinds of mathematical structures that make sense for music. but his question wasn't focused.

@robjohn jstor.org/discover/10.2307/… :-)).

What makes me think that bins are involved was his assertion that "Binary path means a union of notes and open intervals". Now, "interval" has rather different meanings in mathematics and music, and using the word in this context without specifying which is meant is, to me, a sign that being understood is not on one's agenda.

@JonasTeuwen does that answer the question you were having?

@robjohn Yes.

@JonasTeuwen I just downloaded the PDF, I will look at it.

@JonasTeuwen next time you link to JSTOR (or any other article): please use the stable url :) (on JSTOR it's on the right of the article in the meta-info)

@tb Okay!

i was listening to some qawwali last night, and i thought about how shallow most of the music i am more familiar with is

omg the explain logarithms to pre-schoolers is going ballistic...

Oh wow.

I'm bored of this question^ Already was before it had any answers.

I don't like Hardy's answer there.

He sounds very rude these days. I think he should respect the fact that no one is idealized and can misread.

But this is no surprise as I have already put him on the ignore list of mine.

I failed to parse that one.

Sorry I'll contain myself.

I saw that you rascal you.

What the... Totally missed this one.

Also, "ideal" is not quite the same as "idealized."

There should be a bookmarklet to make the chat page ignore removal messages from the server...

i personally like the "cookie" answer, probably because i like cookies (just ask any browser of mine)

@HenningMakholm Yes! Why don't you write one! : )

@tb Look, here's a carrot pats teddy on the head and feeds him a carrot

munch

well, pooperdogs, i still can't sleep, and haven't slept yet. perhaps i will give it another go.

@MattN What? And have to debug Javascript code? I'm not that much of a masochist.

@DavidWheeler good luck! sleep well

@HenningMakholm Oh. I was quite sure you were. : )

i actually dread sleeping. i have terrible nightmares.

@tb that is just ridiculous.

It is.

@HenningMakholm Related: have you seen the "wat" talk? : )

can you get more blatantly off-topic?

@DavidWheeler Jonas might have something that would help you sleep :-)

@tb besides, a log is just a piece of wood to put in the fireplace.

liek wat?

@MattN Um, wat?

@robjohn yeah, but hard to explain :)

@HenningMakholm Here : )

not even 2 minutes. That must be a record.

@MattN Needs flash. Can't view at home.

But no, haven't seen it.

@tb when I looked at the question the votes went from 0, to -1, to -2, and two comments appeared. :-)

@HenningMakholm Well then watch it when you can, it's the funniest comp sci talk I've come across so far (and it's short).

And it mentions JavaScript (among others)

@robjohn That was probably more entertaining than the Sunday evening crime movie on telly :)

@DavidWheeler liek usquebaugh

@MattN @robjohn Can you suggest me some Gravatar like yours, I think I want to get rid of this Langlands thingy... People seem to dislike that...

I didn't mean to imply that!

You mean the scramblomessage is about Langland's program?

@anon Yes, but it is not about it---it is just it. So, no hard work--don't decode.

Kannappan Sampath -- Langlands Program

You already know it.

@KannappanSampath Why not encode something funny in it? Or do you dislike the barcode look?

I just pick up things from deviantart

@MattN yeah there was another dude having such a "scramblomessage" saying you just uncorked 5 geek points or something to that end. That's what triggered the discussion.

lol : D

@MattN Yes. I am gonna get rid of this kind of thing but I don't want an usual one too.

You could follow the lead of Henning and Jonas.

Good idea.

Put me out there and scare people?

(They are not scary, but I am.)

@BrianMScott Not everyone has a natural-born beautiful Gravatar like our blessed kind :)

:-) We did get pretty lucky.

Actually mine had some plastic surgery...

@KannappanSampath You could give them that serious look, like joriki.

Mine hasn't and I consider myself the luckiest of all of you : )

@BrianMScott : D

@Brian Very nice answer on the "Lebesgue spaces" by the way, I really liked the edit.

Oh, good. I had fun working that out after I went to bed this morning.

(I only dislike the term Lebesgue space). There are at least as many completely different ones as p-spaces :)

@tb That's why I went for a mug instead. The identicon I got was an uninspired barf-colored jumble of random geometry.

@tb I’m not too keen on it either, but it was a convenient verbal shorthand for that problem.

And you have the excuse that you didn't make that term up :)

My original gravatar was not too bad, but not very distinctive (and it was brown).

@HenningMakholm Now that’s what I call a proper description!

I had a bad gravatar too.

Well, judge for yourself:

gravatar.com/avatar/… (Hm, doesn't auto-embed like image links usually do).

Here is my original gravatar

@HenningMakholm I’ve seen worse.

@robjohn Not as bad as Henning's.

@BrianMScott Mine, yes, was way worst.

@robjohn That would be quite interesting in a different color.

@BrianMScott Probably

@KannappanSampath This? Right, that's not pretty.

Shouldn't have done that. Sorry.

@HenningMakholm Yes, and there was another green one which was also horrible.

I flagged you anyway.

(I used two email ids...)

@tb You'd talk behind my back as well? Really? Like, "is her avatar really an eye? it looks more like a nose or something".

@HenningMakholm A bemused victim surrounded by vengeful ghosts?

@Gigili No I don't do that. Momentary lapse of reason.

Heh.

Here is the gravatar that I would get with the new remailer address that I now need to use. At least it is green.

I like the other design better :-)

I like green better than orange.

@Gigili Looks kind of like a $\bigcirc\Big\rangle$ to me.

You don't look angry there.

@robjohn So do I.

@BrianMScott What exactly is that? If you don't want to edit it again to make my eyebrow worse.

I'm just a lucky person:

@Gigili Abstract art based on the picture?

: )

The angle bracket needs a sharper bend, though.

That was what I got originally.

And I like your eyebrow.

Right, some how teddy and Brian got lucky!

Srivatsan is lucky as well.

Srivatsan and myself did plastical surgery, as I said...

@BrianMScott Thank you.

@MattN Someone broke a stained glass window, and it’s exploding.

Did you change the colour to purple?

@BrianMScott Yes. The pattern could be slightly better. But I like the colour.

@MattN no, I just tried out some semi-sensical fake addresses and then grabbed the one I liked best.

: D

I think I'm going to have a play with this...

@MattN for the second time today: here's how

@tb The previous one was me, not Matt.

yes, I know.

Oh, you said it like he asked twice or something.

I wasn't precise enough: the second time today that I link to this answer today :)

I don't know what my internal clock says. It's still kinda Saturday.

Does anyone remember if this was Asaf's original gravatar?

@tb Rubbish goes out on Monday night, and a friend comes over for dinner on Thursday evening. Otherwise I no longer have any regular ties to a schedule, so I often have only a vague sense of what day it is.

@robjohn Dunno, but it’s boring.

@tb Ah, that's exactly what I've been doing :-)

@BrianMScott it is. I put the email address I have into the works, and that is what comes out.

@robjohn I don't remember. He always was this brownish thing.

@tb I thought it was orangish, but maybe my screen is off.

It's a darker orange than yours. I'm very bad when it comes to naming colors. Especially in foreign languages.

@BrianMScott , Good afternoon, Brian! I havent seen you in a while.

@robjohn You’re yellowish-orange; the highlight on messages to me is orange.

@FortuonPaendrag I was sick for a while and didn’t drop in very often.

@Brian I hope you are better now?

Yeah, here is his gravatar. Definitely using a different email address.

Ah, Im glad to hear( That you're better now). I have a historical question for you, if you are free.

@robjohn Isn't it red?

Brownish red?

@robjohn That one is doctored, actually. Tack on &f=y and you get a different image.

@robjohn Right, the Indian rug. Reddish brown.

@FortuonPaendrag I can try to answer.

When was the Sigma first used for summation? Was it by Euler?

@HenningMakholm that is a different image. It is a very sickly shade.

@FortuonPaendrag jeff560.tripod.com/operation.html The summation symbol (the Greek letter sigma) was first used by Leonhard Euler (1707-1783) in 1755

@robjohn My father would have called that goose-turd green, I think.

@Gigili it's pretty close to sienna3: burnt sienna

@BrianMScott looks only slightly green, but I can see that considering some of the camo colors they use in the military.

@HenningMakholm That confirms (with more detail) my memory. I’m pretty sure that in some of his earlier papers he didn’t use it.

@HenningMakholm Thank you

@tb That's it. Thank you.

I wish someone could come up with a nicer answer here one that uses less heavy machinery.

But I guess all the Lie stuff can't be avoided.

I wanted to ask Arturo if his message is copyrighted!

I'm reading something I've written over a year ago. I fail to understand what I have done there.

happens all the time :)

Oh, good :-).

A bounty? Srsly? : )

How generous.

Bleh. That guy rubs me the wrong way. Has an opinion about everything and an ego like a mountain and thinks he's funny. But he's not even in the slightest.

@MattN Which guy?

And his profile makes me want to punch someone in the face.

Well I can't really post names now, can I.

But I guess there aren't that many people who posted a comment on that post with a profile like that.

Me? :(.

Noooooo!

Of course not! : )

Besides you don't think you are funny, you are funny.

@MattN poor boy scouts...

@tb It doesn't mention any...

okay, then the other candidate.

@tb Would Nate know about Lie stuff? 8-).

I don't think so. My bet is on David Speyer or Matt E. or paul garrett if they happen to see the thread.

Nope.

Then it should be the scout....

how many more hints do you need? :)

I think I took @tb's help to figure out what is it that he posted in every answer as a tag line: HTH... blah I don't remember the blah.

^thank you. : )

And come on, how many of them have a profile that makes me roll my eyes when I read it?

The fighting lover?

Yes. : )

’Tis quite a profile. I like Arturo’s.

I am bored.

@BrianMScott At least not wordy.

I hope my profile isn't invoking any agression 8-).

I guess a profile alone isn't enough : )

I've got an e-mail from some mathematician from some country far away with some suggestion how to improve my theorem but I haven't some clue what he means with it.

@JonasTeuwen If you want to annoy me just blabber on incessantly, ideally context-free, whine or nag (like a girl) and have an opinion about everything without having a clue of what you're talking about. Then present this non-truth as universal truth and use it to advise or tell others what to do and what not to do.

@MattN Bladder on? Is that like pissing and moaning?

(is joke)

@BrianMScott Corrected : ) Thanks!

I was actually thinking that you intended blather, which fits perfectly.

@BrianMScott Meh. Too late to edit.

Oh, well.

</motz>

It often takes me more time to understand what is even the question than actually solve it...

fun impending :)

@tb Might be in response to this (in case anyone is interested)

Reminds me of "zie"...

I'll just look the other way and hope Michael Hardy comes by to write a sermon on the One True Way to use TeX.

: D

@MattN bleeeh

@MattN I think that Peter’s edit was unnecessary, but I agree with his preference.

But where does zyx get the notion that \Sigma seems to be preferred here? I rarely see that.

No, he says that \sum seems to be preferred here $-$ and I think that he’s right.

Well, when I think about it (and look at the original version), I think it's a meaning-carrying typographic clue that the bottom of the summation sign descends below the baseline of the surrounding text. Otherwise it looks like a variable letter to me.

@BrianMScott oh, right. I didn't read carefully enough. Unfortunately zyx switched the order of the symbols he's talking about from the first paragraph to the second.

zyx is probably a bit too hard going on edits.

@BrianMScott Do you think I'm being too brief in the actual mathematics here and too rambling otherwise? In other words: should I provide a more detailed argument and scratch the reflexivity and James-thing?

Teddy's random ramblings?

I remember another user like that--who would complain if we edited his answer.

Yes.

(a top rep user, I guess.)

@tb No, I like that answer.

I should go to bed.

I’ve rejected some edits simply because I thought that they were completely unnecessary and added little if any value.

@MattN Me too.

Good night everyone.

@BrianMScott Thanks! I was a bit unsure because it isn't clear to me that infinite-dimensional spaces were intended at all.

Bye all of you. Good night.

Good night Matt

And now I've gone back on my quad-starred intention above...

@MattN Good night.

Good night Kannappan

Good night, Matt, Kannappan.

Nice : )

@tb Since it’s left open by the wording of the question, I think that it’s a good idea at least to mention the issue. And you’ve arranged the post so that the extras don’t get in the way of the essentials.

@tb: Have a minute? I have a quick German question!

@BrianMScott Yes, that was exactly the idea. Thanks again!

@Gigili Sure!

How do you say "noted" in German? as In "note that blablabla", "noted, thank you"

There's not one single word for both uses and it depends very much on the context. Let me try to give a sample, just a minute.

Okay, if I have operators $S, T$ and $K$, then is there some easy thing that $T$ and $S$ must satisfy if I want to have that $$\|T K u\| \lesssim \|S K u\|$$ if $K$ is a contractive operator on $L^1$ (all norms are $L^1$ norms).

Are there contexts in which one could say Das habe ich zur Kenntnis genommen?

@BrianMScott Yes, but that's very formal and in all circumstances I can think of apologetic.

I was pretty sure about the formality; I wasn’t aware of the connotation, though.

Actually not sense I am making as any bounded operator can be made into a contractive one by scaling, I mean bounded with operator norm strictly smaller than $1$.

Whee! I am chuffed! Capped at $320$. Makes me feel useful.

@Gigili "Note that blabla" would be most directly translated into "Beachte, dass..." or "Bemerke, dass ..." but it sounds a little "teacher-y".

@tb No way to say it without "dass"?

"Noted."

Oh, you're talking about the first part.

Must be schizophrenia.

To avoid the imperative mood you can often see constructions like "Es ist zu bemerken/beachten, dass ..."

Aha, thank you.

And "noted" would be "bemerkt"?

But that's only written (the Es ist zu ...-bit). If you say it it's even more "teacher-y".

@Gigili Could you give me a context in which you would want to say "noted"? I can't think of a direct translation.

If somebody tells you something then you would say "alles klar" for instance (a bit informal but quite widespread).

‘Note that if you have a parenthesis outside the Mathjax immediately following a curly brace inside, the curly brace won’t display.’

‘Noted.’

Umm, like when someone says "Eh? Annoying me? Note than my turn will come very soon" .. And the person would say "Okay, noted" in reply.

Or what Brian said.

Well, "alles klar" would be perfectly fine for that... I checked in my big dictionary and they don't offer anything better. I sometimes say "Ich habe es zur Kenntnis genommen" towards the end of a fight. "Point taken, won't happen again" more or less.

@tb Thank you. I mean, thank you.

@Gigili The problem with "Ich habe es zur Kenntnis genommen" is that it sounds also a little dismissive depending on context. He wrote me a letter that he was going to marry -- ich habe es zur Kenntnis genommen -- okay, good for him, I don't care much, won't take any action.

Mir isch’s gonz gliakh? :-)

ja, schnurzpiepegal :)

exactly...

@tb Meaning the subject doesn't matter to me?

Is there any common trick to use fixed points to prove norm equivalence? 8-). If not, I can skip that route.

@BrianMScott Is it Swiss-German?

Ist mir egal?

Ist mir ganz egal.

(perfect Swiss German, at that!)

@tb That’s a new one on me; I like it!

@Gigili Du nimmst einen Befehl zur Kenntnis, oder eine Vorladung von einem Amt. Das macht keine Freude, aber es fuehrt kein Weg daran vorbei. Du nimmst eine Einladung zur Kenntnis, okay, musst wohl hingehen, willst aber eigentlich nicht. Du nimmst eine Kritik zur Kenntnis. Ja, okay, hat ja wohl recht, aber ich will mich trotzdem nicht entschuldigen oder mehr tun.

Wunderbar!

@tb That gives me a pretty good feel for it, I think. Thanks.

@tb Ich habe ja deine Kritik zur Kenntnis genommen. Dankeschön.