« first day (2786 days earlier)      last day (2220 days later) » 

7:00 PM
Very cool, @Tobias. If we ever end up in the same corner of the earth, we can play :)
 
Yeah, I think they are looking into making the automatic mahjong tables do the same, but those are too expensive for most local clubs to afford
 
@TedShifrin i cant think of such a function, example?
 
@Silent: Do you have any thoughts?
 
And affording enough for an actual tournament would probably require the game to be more popular outside of China and Japan than it currently is
 
does anyone play seep? (card game)
 
7:01 PM
Have you ever played the game Carcassonne, @Tobias? It's quite cool, somewhat mathematical. There's even an iPad app for it.
(I also happen to love the town in France after which it's named.)
 
@TedShifrin I have played it a few times. I like it as a game to play with people who don't regularly play board games, since it is fairly simple and not too deep strategically (so people don't end up spending too much time trying to optimize their play)
I have considered getting it myself, since it is also of an appropriate level of difficulty to play with my daughter without having to alter the rules to make them easier
 
I find it sufficiently challenging myself :)
DogAteMy!!
 
sup chat
 
heya ERic
 
7:06 PM
how's it going
 
Eric, if you're interested, there's someone asking a bunch of minimal surfaces questions (based on Minicozzi/Colding's book) on main.
 
what's going on
 
heya Antonios
Anyone left in the algebra course?
 
seems she did end up curving the exam, or at least so I've been told.
some had already dropped though, I think.
 
Still it would be nice if people learned something ...
 
7:09 PM
yeah, exactly.
 
Hmmmm
 
That reminds me. Got the preliminary plan for re-exams today. 6 people eligible for the algebra re-exam. Should not be too tough to grade those, though it feels like a shame to have to make an entire exam set just for 6 people
 
@LeakyNun ?
 
I’m trying to put together what I thought I figured out, but now I don’t trust it. Bummer
 
@Tobias: I've written several qualifying exams just for one student over the years.
 
7:10 PM
@LeakyNun How does origami make the fact that the torus quotiented by a meridian and parallel is a sphere obvious?
 
@Semiclassic: Have you found an error in the write-up?
 
@TedShifrin How long are those?
 
3 hour written exams, Tobias.
 
An error in my use of a certain bound
 
Oh, you mean like viewing the torus as a square with opposite sides identified? @LeakyNun
 
7:10 PM
ok, so about the same (this is a 4 hour exam)
 
The premise was stronger than I realized.
 
Aha.
 
@TedShifrin ill check it out
 
@AkivaWeinberger right, and then the quotient basically identifies the boundary of the square
 
Don't make premises you can't keep
 
7:11 PM
so you get a sphere
 
Right, I see
 
DogAteMy: With talk like that, Demonark will materialize.
 
The context was that I wanted to find a bound on $\text{tr}(U^\top U S)$ in terms of the Frobenius norm of U and the eigenvalues of S
But the argument I saw assumed S was positive definite, and mine isn’t
 
Can you make a perturbative argument?
 
Dunno.
The awkward thing is that I have an example for S, but I’m not sure how I should be generalizing it
The example has S being symmetric and orthogonal.
 
7:15 PM
@TedShifrin These programs do feel a bit slow at times, since I already know the rules and a bit about bidding. But on the other hand, they do teach some fundamentals I did not know. Just went through a chapter on finessing, which is not something I had really considered before.
 
Yeah, and if you have a choice of finessing either way, do you have information from which to infer which way is more likely? (Bidding/counting points that have shown up in the respective hands, signals, etc.)
 
@TedShifrin This is before anything about bidding. But it did make a point of having you play as many cards as you could safely do before choosing which finess to take.
 
Yup, lots to learn.
 
in that example I can do a Cauchy-Schwarz argument (since that trace can be understood as the Frobenius inner product) in order to deduce a bound
 
7:17 PM
So I like that.
The weird thing, which I feel like I should understand, is that the bound should only be saturated when $U=US$
Where U is 3-by-4 and S is 4-by-4 in my example
Obviously, the rank of U is at most 3. But i feel like I should be able to say more than that.
 
@TedShifrin yup
we got the second pset today
 
Excitement.
 
It's $\sum_{i,j}\langle u_i,u_j\rangle s_{ji}$, which is a kind of dot product if you interpret them as vectors with $n^2$ entries.
 
mr @anon!
 
Right.
You can view it as the Frobenius inner product of U and US with S orthogonal
Or, well
In the case I understand, S is orthogonal
I’m not sure I really need that but for now I don’t know how to dispense with it
 
7:25 PM
Is anyone here familiar with intersection homology?
 
I am new to Math.SE. I have seen an accepted answer to some question that contains a fundamental mistake. Can you tell me what to do? If this is not the right location to ask this question, please excuse me and tell me ahere to look.
 
guys , how is $\dfrac{f(1+x)-f(1)}{x}=f^{'}(1)$ limit x $\to$ 0
 
@Helmut: All you can do is put a comment explaining why it's wrong.
@Tanuj: It is NOT, unless you put limit in there.
oh, there is a limit now.
That's the definition of the derivative.
 
ok thanks
 
@Ted Shifrin OK. I already did that - and wrote a better answer... Thanks
 
7:31 PM
Cool :)
 
@TedShifrin
How was this bit done ? Where did the 6 from the upper and lower limits disappear ?
 
Hello
 
@Tanuj: I assume the function is periodic with period $T$ or something.
Hi Demonark
 
@TedShifrin yes.
 
Period T? Or period 6?
 
7:40 PM
Is there any property for periodic function's integration ?
period T
 
Not 6.
@Tanuj: If you integrate over a period (or several periods), it doesn't matter where you start.
 
Oh I was thinking period 6 because you translated by 6, that makes sense
 
Draw pictures.
 
Hey @Alessandro, how's it going?
 
7:41 PM
@TedShifrin okay , so how would you state this property mathematically ?
 
@Daminark pretty well, what about you?
 
$\int_a^{a+T} f(t)\,dt = \int_b^{b+T} f(t)\,dt$.
 
Same here, basically recovered from the flu modulo a stubborn cough
 
@TedShifrin thanks :)
 
I doubt the stubborn cough generates a normal subgroup
 
7:42 PM
leaves Balarka and Demonark to descend into humorless hell
 
Tired
 
hi Mike
 
@TedShifrin I could replace $b=0$ , right ?
 
Hey Mike
 
@Balarka
 
7:43 PM
It's true for any $a$ and $b$, @Tanuj. Can you prove it?
 
Are you familiar with intersection homology?
 
We go into the humorless hell and make it humorous. But yeah it probably doesn't but you just take the normal closure anyway so it's fine
Hey @Mike!
 
@TedShifrin idk , but thanks.I'll give it a try.
 
I tried asking yesterday but I guess you didn't see, have you ever taken that model theory course? @Dami
 
@gian Unfortunately no
 
7:43 PM
Bye for now ...
 
Okay, I will post then. Thanks anyways :)
 
Nope, I will hopefully take it next year
 
@TedShifrin Bye ! Take care :)
 
See you @Ted!
 
Ah, that's a pity, I had a model theory question
 
7:48 PM
Who in the name of jibberjabber flubberflickering hell is littering the star panel with trash
Some kind soul unbanned me
But I rage in thy general direction whoever flagged me
 
@BalarkaSen Maybe consistently don't use profanity.
(I unbanned you because your message was not actually offensive, but don't count on that happening every time)
 
I do think that it's reasonable to consistently use profanity, but I also think it's fair to assume a consistent ban from it
It's a fair trade
 
Is it a profanity to call someone a steely dan
Just counting if made up words count
(That's a very elaborate sex toy from one of Burroughs' novel)
 
8:08 PM
@AlessandroCodenotti ah, F
Ask me in a year
 
Are you able to offer reference/book recommendations?
 
Am I crazy, or is $E_{ij}E_{k\ell} = \delta_{jk}E_{i\ell}$ for the elementary matrices $E_{ij}$ with 1 in the $(i,j)$-position and 0 elsewhere?
 
@user525966 depends, best to just go and make the request and if someone knows about it, they'll answer
 
just trying to make a list of books I should buy
 
Zee
Don’t waste your money buying more than one book at a time , max 2
 
8:21 PM
Use libgen tbh. But really it's hard to give a universal list of books that everyone should have. Depends on your specific needs
 
So far I have things on it like Tao's Analysis vol 1, Spivak's Calculus 3rd edition, Munkres' Topology Vol 2, Probability Theory (Jaynes), Principles of Mathematical Analysis (Rudin), etc
 
Amen @Zee
Made the mistake once of buying like 5 books and still have not read a single one of them
 
Zee
Lol same , I have like 30 books in my math library, probably read like 5 of them
Reading a math book takes long time , it takes a whole year to read an average math book
 
@Zee I would say that a year is too much, except perhaps for a few special ones
 
Zee
Well it would take you atleast a year to read the intro graduate books on real analysis and algebra
 
8:26 PM
@TobiasKildetoft I was wondering if the dual question I had you help me with earlier was at all connected to using the $f_i := e_{i+1,i}$ to define the highest weight vectors (that is, f_i kill the highest weights).
 
@Zee No, the ones on algebra take me much less than that
@anakhronizein Not sure what you mean
 
Zee
if You can read Hungerford in less than a year than your a better man than I am
 
@Zee Hungerford is one of those special ones
 
Well the highest weight with respect to the lower borel subalgebra
I don't know exactly how to phrase it.
 
@anakhronizein You mean highest weights, except with respect to the negative roots instead of the positive ones?
 
8:29 PM
Yes.
I think that is right
 
What comes "next" after functional analysis
Is there a continuation of that?
 
Zee
operator Theory ? Analysis on metric spaces ?
 
harder functional analysis
 
>analysis on metric spaces
wew
 
Zee
Infinite dimensional geometry?
 
8:30 PM
I enjoyed Chapter 3 and 7 in Rudin the most. With series and sequences (mostly sequences) of functions.
 
@anakhronizein It should be to some extend, since the way we "fix" the duality is essentially to transpose the matrices (except we don't do this when we do things abstractly)
 
What is "harder" functional analysis
haha, analysis on metric spaces
 
@orbit-stabilizer Nothing, nobody survives to functional analysis
 
depends on what you mean by "functional analysis"
 
Zee
??? That’s a research topic
 
8:31 PM
@orbit-stabilizer there seems to be (at least in my experience) a lot with functional analysis and non-commutative geometry. So I think that is one of the many branches that branch out.
 
I mean something like an intro functional analysis class would teach after measure theory. So, stuff like weak* convergence, etc.
Analysis on metric spaces? Where else are you going to do analysis?
 
Zee
Topological vector spaces ?
 
I think you're spewing a bunch of words semi-randomly
 
Zee
I think you judge things in a facile way
 
my other answer was a joke but i would say that after you know the basics of functional analysis there's no direct next thing you can do, but you can apply the things you learned in like half of all math lol
 
8:34 PM
I do that as a form of humor
It goes poorly
 
@Zee analysis on metric spaces is like your third year analysis course in your undergrad.
If not second.
 
First time hearing about non-commutative geometry
 
So, my analysis prof said that there's two main directions you can go with functional analysis. One is geometry of Banach spaces, the other is PDE. It has applications elsewhere (e.g. Ergodic theory) but those are probably what someone who's principally interested in functional analysis will end up doing
 
Zee
Jesus , when I say analysis on metric space , am talking about the subject of generalizing analysis from eucledian spaces to metric measure spaces , see the book by Ambrosio for example
 
@MikeMiller Hey there! Doing any interesting gauge theory lately? ;)
 
8:36 PM
Ambrosio: a Brazilian model and actress.
 
@Daminark wb algebraic geometry tho
 
@orbit-stabilizer Are Hahn-Banach, Banach-Steinhaus and the open mapping theorem in Rudin? Those are the "big three" in an intro to functional analysis, then you get the weak and weak* topology, Banach-alaoglu and stuff, then you have the basics and you can see what you're more interesting in to go from there. That's also where I decided I had enough functional analysis and moved on to something else :P
 
@Zee You can think that
 
@Dami, thanks - that sounds interesting. PDEs don't sound that fun
 
It's a good thought
 
8:38 PM
@Alessandro, they're in papa rudin almost surely
I was talking about baby rudin
 
You can take it down an interesting avenue for sure, we talked about Sobolev spaces and Hille-Yosida, but yeah it wasn't quite my favorite part of the class.
@EricSilva Tru
 
@Zee, are you talking about geometric measure theory?
 
Are they even in Papa Rudin? I expected grandpa
 
grothenjoke 2 stronk
 
Zee
@BalarkaSen people like you are the reason nobody in math is comfortable asking trivial questions, you immediately put them in a low catagory even if they have decent knowledge
 
8:39 PM
I don't care about boundary conditions :P
@Zee, woah, Balaraka doesn't do that
 
They are in cousin Rudin, surely.
 
@Zee i think ur being too hard on balarka he's a good egg
 
If not Aunt Rudin.
 
There's also some fredholm theory stuff that can be done after functional analysis if one likes integral equations
 
8:40 PM
@Zee I like trivial questions, but not pretentious namedropping
Or at least, what I think as pretentious namedropping
 
@BalarkaSen who namedropped
 
Zee
When did I name drop?
 
Hahn-Banach Theorem is on page 104 in papa rudin
 
@orbit-stabilizer Topological vector spaces
 
He means buzz words, I think.
 
8:40 PM
One does not like integral equations
Is complex analysis useful for functional analysis stuff?
@0celo7, without a norm?
 
@orbit-stabilizer oh, many interesting spaces have no norm
 
If you already know what a Banach space is (and maybe have seen the $L^p$ spaces, but just to have some examples to keep in mind) I suggest Brezis as a functional analysis book. It assumes a bit of knowledge, but not a lot (it starts with Hahn-Banach on page 1)
 
weak topologies, Frechet spaces, inductive spaces
 
I'm not surprised that many don't. I'm surprised you can do analysis on them.
 
You can
 
8:42 PM
How do you get a notion of distance?
 
i wish i knew Frechet
 
There's usually some notion of distance like a family of seminorms
 
too many interesting Frechet manifolds
too little ways to make them Banach
 
But not always a norm and not even always a metric
 
aaaaAAAAA
 
8:43 PM
how to show that pointwise convergence implies almost everywhere convergent??
 
@Shobhit what?
 
huh okay
 
the schwartz space is a pretty classically important frechet space
 
@AlessandroCodenotti, okay I'll take a look at that
thanks
 
Oh hi @BalarkaSen I actually did not notice it was you.
 
8:44 PM
honestly @orbit-stabilizer should just learn infinite dimensional manifold theory after functional analysis
@anakhronizein Hahah hi!
 
@orbit-stabilizer I've heard that you use Liouville to prove that operators on complex Banach spaces have spectra
 
I forgot to greet as well
 
@Daminark yes it is great.
Certainly worth a course.
 
@orbit-stabilizer Complex analysis is very important. The holomorphic functional calculus is very useful.
 
I am studying modes of convergence in my measure theory book, its given that pointwise convergence implies almost everywhere convergence @0celo7
how?
 
8:45 PM
@BalarkaSen I guess that'd be a topological space that locally looks like an infinite dimensional space rather than $\Bbb R^n$?
 
@BalarkaSen hi
 
yeah locally modeled on bad shit
Hey @LeakyNun!
 
@Shobhit How is a.e. convergence defined if not pointwise convergence a.e.?
 
(Plus Hausdorff and some more adjectives I guess)
 
@Daminark Check washington
 
8:46 PM
@BalarkaSen I'm looking at excision
 
Our class did functional before complex so we stuck to the real case
 
Nice, that's a good theorem
 
btw the definition of chain homotopy seems rather arbitrary
 
@LeakyNun I have an answer explaining the geometric content somewhere
 
why $\partial P + P \partial = g - f$
 
8:46 PM
@0celo7 i dont understand
 
10
A: Geometric Interpretation of Chain Homotpy

Balarka SenChain homotopies are an abstract way to define homotopy in the category $\mathsf{Ch}_\bullet$ of chain complexes. But indeed, there is a geometric interpretation of this. $f, g : X \to Y$ be two homotopic maps, with homotopy given by $F : X \times [0, 1] \to Y$. $f_{\#}, g_{\#}$ be the induced m...

 
@Shobhit Unless you tell me what you think a.e. convergence means, I have to conclude you haven't read the definitions!
 
@BalarkaSen well that's just copied out of Hatcher :P
 
why does everyone seem to have so much free time to study new math except me :(
 
it's a reformulation, if you want to say.
 
8:48 PM
Hmmm alirghtt
 
@anakhronizein I don't. I'm typing a horrific calculation right now
 
I remember being confused about Hatcher's explanation so I wrote it down
and it became quite clear
 
Infinite dimensional manifold theory - is that a joke?
 
I think there are more categorical explanations, though, which actually makes $P$ a morphism $C_\bullet(X) \otimes C_\bullet(I) \to C_\bullet(Y)$
 
@anakhronizein Balarka doesn't sleep, I don't know how the others manage to do that
 
8:48 PM
@0celo7 come cry with me.
 
@Balarka One might even say, self-evident.
 
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2702346/show-that-f-fg-is-an-isomorphism-where-fg-g2-no-elements-of-order

yo guys, if anyone is up for some basic algebra exercise, lemme know
 
@BalarkaSen hmm..
 
@LeakyNun Here's a thought experiment. What if you were working with maps from cubes instead of maps from simplices?
Like, that's what your singular complex is. $C_k(X)$ is the free abelian group on maps from $I^k$ to $X$
 
oh ok. $(f_{n})$ converges to $f$ almost everywhere if there exists a set $M \in$ X with $\mu(M)=0$ such that for all $\epsilon>0$ and $x \in$ X $-M$, there exists a natural number $N(\epsilon, x)$ such that if $n \ge N$ then $|f_{n}(x)-f(x)| < \epsilon$ @0celo7
 
8:50 PM
I don't joke about manifolds
 
The boundary map is self-evident (@orbit-stabilizer there you go)
Then $P$ should be easier to understand
 
Do you know the result of your thought experiment Balarka?
 
Sure, it says entropy of the universe increases
 
@Shobhit what is that funny x
 
$\mathsf{x}\mathsf{x}\mathsf{x} \, \mathsf{Tentacles}$
 
8:56 PM
@ShaVuklia done
 
$\sigma$ algebra on $X$.
 
@BalarkaSen then what?
 
@Shobhit Then this is completely trivial. Write out what the pointwise convergence means.
 
@anakhronizein what is this "free time" you speak of?
 
@LeakyNun Then $P$ is literally the map $C_n(X) \to C_{n+1}(Y)$ sending a singular $n$-cuboid $\square$ in $X$ to the $(n+1)$-cuboid $f(\square \times I)$ in $Y$
 
8:59 PM
so if i say that let $M \ne \phi$ belong in $\sigma$ algebra on $X$ s.t $\mu(M)=0$. then by pointwise convergence on X $-M$, we have what we want. Now if such an $M$ exist, we are done, if there does exist such an $M$, then what does that mean? or will there always exist such an $M$? @0celo7
 
Between time dedicated to work, time dedicated to thinking about future work, and time dedicated to shitposting, I have nothing!
 

« first day (2786 days earlier)      last day (2220 days later) »