« first day (3318 days earlier)      last day (1999 days later) » 
00:00 - 23:0023:00 - 00:00

00:01
@AkivaWeinberger yeah
$\sin A+\sin B=2\sin\left(\frac12(A+B)\right)\cos\left(\frac12(A-B)\right)$
I guess it doesn't work well for other timbres since 440 vs 441 gives you 1 beat per second where as 880 vs 882 gives you 2 beats for second etc
so the overtones kinda make the pulse weaker
@AkivaWeinberger yep
ok doing it with the sawtooth wave (the last one) kinda creates a cool effect
@AkivaWeinberger oh no the noise-reduction effect is real
open up two tabs, keep them 440, play the first one
then to the second one play, stop, play, stop, play, stop
until you get lucky
then the volume will decrease significantly
00:30
Suppose I have a nonempty simply connected space $X$ (which is not necessarily a CW Complex), does there exist a continuous map $f : X \to K(\pi_2(X), 2)$ such the $f_* = 1_{\pi_2(X)}$?
The answer is true if $X$ is a CW-Complex
But I am not sure if it holds if $X$ is not a CW-Complex
@Perturbative I only care about CW-complexes
$[X,K(G,n)] = H^n(X;G)$
$[X,K(\pi_2(X),2)] = H^2(X;\pi_2(X))$
@LeakyNun Yeah I wanna try and avoid that bijection tho, since it relies on the Hurewicz theorem
what's wrong with Hurewicz
@LeakyNun You know what the next step would be?
And the reason I need the result is to prove a generalization of Hurewicz
00:34
Get two laptops
and play the tone 440 on one and 441 on the other
And classical Hurewicz is supposed to pop out as a nice corollary or something like that I guess
@AkivaWeinberger why?
gaps between the first 1000 primes
Maybe the fact that it's coming out of the same speaker influences things
00:35
Also - it'll depend on your relative distance to each of them
oh well if you have two different sources
then the interference gets a bit more complicated right
If you're halfway between them you might get stronger beats than if you're right next to one
you better be at their perpendicular bisector
actually you can just have your left earphone play one and right the other
@Perturbative and $H^2(X;\pi_2(X))$ should equal $\operatorname{Hom}(H_2(X),\pi_2(X))$ right
and then $H_2 = \pi_2$
done
00:38
@LeakyNun What do you mean by $H_2 = \pi_2$?
well Hurewicz
$0 \to \operatorname{Ext}_R^1(\operatorname{H}_{i-1}(X; R), G) \to H^i(X; G) \, \overset{h} \to \, \operatorname{Hom}_R(H_i(X; R), G)\to 0$
$0 \to \operatorname{Ext}(H_1(X), \pi_2(X)) \to H^2(X; \pi_2(X)) \to \operatorname{Hom}(H_2(X), \pi_2(X))\to 0$
$H_1(X) = \pi_1(X)^{ab} = 0^{ab} = 0$
so $H^2(X;\pi_2(X)) = \operatorname{Hom}(H_2(X),\pi_2(X))$
and Hurewicz says that $H_2(X) = \pi_2(X)$ since $X$ is simply connected
so $[X, K(\pi_2(X), 2)] = \operatorname{End}(\pi_2(X))$
Yes I get that, but what I'm saying is that I think that the result that $[X, K(G, n)] = H^n(X; G)$ depends on the Hurewicz theorem implicitly anyway
this site claims that the instance of Hurewicz needed is trivial in this case
they used $X/X^{n-1}$
the claim is that $\pi_n(X/X^{n-1}) = H_n(X/X^{n-1})$
@LeakyNun Thanks for the link
The only issue I have then is that I still require $X$ to be a CW-Complex and I'm trying to avoid that
I think by cellular approximation $[S^n = \partial \Delta^{n+1}, X/X^{n-1}] = [S^n, X^n/X^{n-1}]$
and the latter is basically $\bigvee_\alpha S^n$
00:52
The reason being is that $X$ is the domain of some map, say $f$, and we turn $f$ into a fibration, and fibrations are well-defined up to homotopy equivalence and not weak homotopy equivalence I think
oh and then it should follow from the cellular homology
how does one prove $[S^n, \bigvee_\alpha S^n] = \bigoplus_\alpha \Bbb Z$ though
I'm not sure
Anyway it's late here, thanks for the help Leaky!
ok
ok I should know this
let's work this out
Can someone explain how to show e_i<f_i here math.stackexchange.com/a/2853462/428700
01:49
ok i'm back
I always get distracted
$H_n(X)$ is the homology of $H_{n+1}(X^{n+1}, X^n) \to H_n(X^n, X^{n-1}) \to H_{n-1}(X^{n-1}, X^{n-2})$
for this case we have $X/X^{n-1}$ instead
so the right hand side becomes $0$ and the middle is $\bigoplus_\alpha \Bbb Z$
oh $[S^n, X/X^{n-1}]$ should be equal to $[S^n,X^{n+1}/X^{n-1}]$ instead
and so they are the same, because they're just spelling out the presentations
or rather I should prove that $\pi_n(X^{n+1}/X^{n-1}) = \langle \alpha \mid f(\beta) \rangle$ where $\alpha$ indexes the $n$-cells and $\beta$ the $n+1$-cells
this fact is used in the construction of K(G,n)...
@gustaffIR suppose $P_1$ divides $\mathfrak p_1S$ as many times as $v$, then $P_1$ divides $IS$ as many times as $ve_1$
$P_1$ divides $JS$ as many times as $vk_1$
$v e_1 \le v k_1$
so $e_1 \le k_1$
03:06
When is implication completely associative?
For instance if we have a category where objects are strings representing propositions
(true) propositions
then all arrows, which are implications, associate. Is that correcet?
04:21
Neat
19 equal temperament seems to work really well as well @LeakyNun
but 12TET approximates 3/2 better
@AkivaWeinberger you know what
"fifths" and "fourths", CDEFGABC, they're a big lie
but I guess that's just the harmonic side of the story
pure intervals are great for harmony but not melody
this is such a mess
the more you study something, the more you realize that it's fundamentally flawed
 
3 hours later…
07:22
Morning all
Morning, Meg.
I'm looking for music to listen to while I work on homework. Any suggestions?
Depends what kind of thing you like :) I have a playlist on Spotify called "CalmMate" which I study to
lol
I usually look up 1 hour videos of music on YouTube. Video Game stuff, most of the time. One of my favorites is pppppp.
Apparently I need a spotify account.
Making one.
07:35
Spotify is so good!
The majority of that playlist is instrumental
Instrumental is good for studying. No lyrics to distract.
Just the first song, but good stuff so far. Sound quality is much better than on YT.
:) I also use a playlist called acoustic concentration
which is all instrumental acoustic guitar music
07:52
"Everything you do is a balloon" Interesting song name.
08:12
lcm is usually defined to be positive, right?
08:32
Given an equality of the form $$\int \left[ f(x) g(x) + h(x) \right] dx = \int f(x) dx $$
for all $f(x)$
Do I have $g(x) = 1$ and $h(x) = 0$?
Assuming sufficient niceness
Wait nvm, obviously not for $h$
Dang it
Though I suppose it might be the case if this is true for every integral range
When is $(a^m)^n = a^(mn)$ generally true? It's not true for fractional powers e.g. $m=2$ and $1/2$ cause then the LHS is $|a|$ but the RHS is $a$
09:14
@LeakyNun Thanks
09:27
@Rithaniel right
also, love everything you do is a balloon
I mean tbf when you're in a general ring most things are defined up to multiplication by units
I believe
(or rather any of the rings that I've come across, which are usually rings of integers(
 
1 hour later…
10:56
So, what propeties does a space need to have in order to ensure that every element has at least one square root? I imagine it needs to be complete, to start.
11:34
@Rithaniel well take the quadratic closure of $\Bbb Q$ as a subfield of $\Bbb C$
then clearly it isn't complete
Ah, there is a term for it: "quadratically closed field?"
Suppose I have a power series with a term-wise index $n$, and my power series has factorial one higher than usual, so usually the taylor expansion reads $$ \sum_0^\infty \frac{f^{(n)}(a)}{n!} (x-a)^n$$, now I have $(n+1)!$ instead of $n!$. Is there any way to know how the closed form expression changes?
@Rithaniel yeah
Best thing I know is the Cauchy product, but a discrete convolution does not exactly get me anywhere
Is spacetime entropy
did Einstein not combine space and time with a binary operation known as the times
And did he not then say: this is spacetime?
11:52
@LeakyNun you are from Hong Kong right?
@LeakyNun are you?
haha
sipping coffe adn texting one hand
Can I put a bounty on that??
I heard that the goverment rejected the proposition
SAME JAKSOJA
11:53
and the ppl has won the fight
is that true? or is RT another fake news
I’m sipping not on lean
but on coffee
And embedded in my coffee is drug
Called caffeine
are you really the only one who is on this chat now?
what a shame
Ill come back later
Wow
An I not enough
I feel like the empty set
if I put it in a nice way , i wish i could give you 0 stars on yelp
Might as well go find Timelord Jordan
11:56
haha jk
Why?????
because you did not contribute anything new to the discussion
I’m gonna go embed my elements in a higher dimensional space and project some of them onto a plane
Bye
Good luck
12:20
@jacksoja i am from hk, govt withdrew the bill, we have not won
@LeakyNun ah the news were wrong, sorry about that
13:03
19 hours ago, by Silent
Where do we use, in this proof, that $f(a,b)$ is not onto?
13:22
@MatheinBoulomenos Hi ! long time no see
Have you solved one of the millenium problems yet?
0
Q: Uniqueness of maximum involving some quadratic functions

Rajesh DachirajuA family of positive convex function $\Psi_{\alpha} : \mathbb{R}^N \to \mathbb{R}$ is defined as $$\Psi_{\alpha}(x) = A(x) + B(x) + \alpha D(x)$$ with paramter $\alpha \in (0,\infty)$. $A(x),B(x),C(x)$ are all positive,quadratic and convex functions. (edit), Also $A,B,D$ are linearly independent....

 
2 hours later…
15:43
We have not won yet, the government had only said to withdrew, and she had not respond to the remaining 4 demands
In other news:
Trying to think of a formal system that allows me to have a bijection between a urelement and the ordinal 5
Hi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spline_(mathematics)#Examples states the pieces on [0,1] and [1,2] must join in value and first derivative (at t=1), but the first derivatives of the first 2 polynomials at t=1 are different.
Am I misunderstanding something or is the Wikipedia article wrong?
Never mind. I calculated the derivative of the first polynomial wrongly. The pieces on [0,1] and [1,2] indeed join in value and first derivative, at t=1, in the first example.
16:05
Note that $\frac{d}{dx}(x-a)\frac{(x-a)^n}{(n+1)!} = \frac{(x-a)^n}{n!}$
So to turn your desired series into your old one, you'd multiply by $(x-a)$ and differentiate. Conversely, your desired series should be found by computing the antiderivative and dividing by $(x-a)$
So $f(x)\to \frac{1}{x-a}\int_a^x f(t)\,dt$ where $f(x)$ is your series. (the reason I'm integrating from $t=a$ to $x$ is to avoid a spurious integration constant)
So that makes that the new function will be the average value of $f(t)$ for $t\in [a,x]$. That's sorta cute.
@Semiclassical Are you writing to me?
Ok
@Semiclassical Can you look at my question? It seems like, in the first example, the derivative of the 2nd and 3rd polynomials of S have the same value at t=2, so this would be a C1 smooth function
But, in that section of the article, they say that the 2nd and 3rd polynomials only join in value and not in the first derivative
Never mind. I again made a wrong calculation. In fact, $P_1'(t) = 2$ and $P_2'(t) = -1 + 2t$, so $P_1'(2) = 2$ and $P_2'(2) = 3$, so it is not C1
@Semiclassical This was about my question right?
The tag was one of the two removed messages?
ya
my initial version was wrong in a silly way
and I forgot to reping
16:32
Hi all, I have somewhat of a basic question. Consider of a seqence $\{f_n\}$ such that there is a $g$ with $|f_n| < g$. Suppose $f_n \rightarrow f$ pointwise. Will it follow that $|f| < g$? And how to prove this?
I was thinking this: $|f| = |\lim f_n| = \lim |f_n| < \lim g = g$ but im not sure
@Semiclassical Interesting, and I guess this generalizes. If I have (m+2)! I can integrate and divide twice?
Of course in alternating fashion :p gotta be consistent
it'd better be "integrate twice and then divide twice"
Ah sure
otherwise you'd be dividing by $n+1$ twice, not by $(n+1)(n+2)$
if you're doing $m$ such antiderivatives, then Cauchy's formula for repeated integration is probably useful
(that lets you do only one integration rather than $m$ of them, at the cost of the integrand being slightly more annoying)
17:06
Hello !
Can someone help with this geometry problem
34
Q: Is there no solution to the blue-eyed islander puzzle?

picakhuText below copied from here The Blue-Eyed Islander problem is one of my favorites. You can read about it here on Terry Tao's website, along with some discussion. I'll copy the problem here as well. There is an island upon which a tribe resides. The tribe consists of 1000 people, w...

How to murder people with classical logic and induction
17:45
@Semiclassical I have a few expressions like for example this one:
$$\sum_2^\infty \frac{(\varepsilon_k)^{m} K_{jk}^{(m-1)}}{m!} $$
Without going too much into notation, it can be resummed to have an (n+2)! in the denominator
And an "(x-a)^2" in front, so I guess I can use your series expansion
Your backwards expansion, ehh how would one call that?!
Marriam Webster suggests reversion :D
I’m not doing any kind of series reversion or inversion
All I’m using is integration
18:00
Hi I need help in understanding a concept used in the solution.
Hi I need help in understanding a concept used in the solution. math.stackexchange.com/questions/3344151/…
If A and B are two projections and W be the range of AB then how trace(AB)=dim(W) ?
@Semiclassical I do have a follow up question
So in reality I have :
$$ \sum_2^\infty f^{(n)}(a) * (x-a)^n / n! $$
So effectively I can resum and get to $$ \sum_0^\infty f^{(n+2)}(a) * (x-a)^{n+2} / (n+2)!$$, so this would imply I could factor out an $(x-a)^2$, redefine $g\equiv f^{(2)}$ then do two integrations, it would imply I get back f(x), but that doesn't make sense to me :/
What do you mean “resum”? All you’ve changed is where the index starts from
Yes sorry, that's what I meant
Shifted index
Also, my remarks were under the assumption that the only thing that changed was n! to (n+1)!
If all the n’s get shifted, then that’s not at all what I was referring to
If the series you get is the Taylor series of f(x), except with the first two terms missing
Then the only useful thing you can say is that that’s $f(x)-f(a)-f’(a)(x-a)$
18:23
Pff, shame
hello all
What do you guys do when you sort of "hit a wall" while thinking about a specific problem.
Do you try for a few hours and then check the solution or you carry on thinking?
This has been bugging me for quite a while. I can't think fast enough and once my thinking stalls and I can't proceed any further no matter how differently I try. This has been bugging me for quite a while.
How can we show: If A and B are two projections and W be the range of AB then how trace(AB)=dim(W) ?
Projection meaning $A^2=A$, right?
@KumarNilesh
19:17
@Semiclassical Thanks for your assistance anyway, I think I figured out why it doesn't work :-)
 
1 hour later…
20:21
I'm having trouble figuring out why (4^a - 1) can never be prime for a > 1 . Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
try writing out the first few examples of such and see if you notice a pattern
20:33
Hiya
20:55
@SubhasisBiswas Do you have a specific example?
Or is this just a question in the abstract
21:22
@Semiclassical Additionally - and this is a bit joking - write those examples in base 4
 
1 hour later…
22:25
@AkivaWeinberger lol, nice
Hey can I think something out loud
We know that as $n\to0$, $\dfrac{x^n-1}n\to\ln x$
Say we didn't know that
but we knew it converged to something finite
call it $f(x)$
so $\dfrac{(x^n-1)(y^n-1)}n\to0$ ('cause it's close to $f(x)(y^n-1)$ which goes to 0)
So some kind of deformed limit?
so $\dfrac{(xy)^n-x^n-y^n+1}n\to0$
I'm writing $\cdot\to\cdot$ to mean $\lim\cdot=\cdot$
So rearranging
I had q-analogs on the brain a few days ago so that’s what I’m thinking of
$\lim\dfrac{(xy)^n-1}n=\lim\dfrac{x^n-1}n+\dfrac{y^n-1}n$
so $f(xy)=f(x)+f(y)$
so this is consistent from what we get from L'Hôpital (that it's $\ln$)
22:39
Eg the q-number of $n$ is defined to be $[n]_q=\frac{1-q^{n}}{1-q}=1+q+q^2+\cdots+q^{n-1}$
$n-1$?
So $1+q+\dotsb+q^{n-2}$?
Fixed
What you’re doing reminds me of that
I can’t tell if there’s a real connection tho
Elementary question on my end (non sequitor)
Linear algebra question with an obvious answer (I think): Is every inner product on $\mathbb{R}^n$ of the form $\langle x,y\rangle=x^\top A y$ for positive definite A?
I suppose it should amount to (bi)linearity
$A_{ij}=\langle e_i,e_j\rangle$, no?
And positive definite comes from the definition of inner product
(as does symmetric)
22:44
Point
If it works for basis vectors it works for all vectors from bilinearity
This is why conics have the equation they do
Any idea how that goes over in infinite dimensions? My knowledge of Fourier series makes me inclined to say it does, but presumably there’s some subtleties I’m forgetting
The formula $Ax^2+Bxy+Cy^2+Dx+Ey+F=0$
is just another way of saying $\langle x,x\rangle=1$ for some inner product
@Semiclassical *sequitur
Er - $D=E=F=0$ actually 'cause it's centered on the origin
22:47
So that’s why my phone was annoyed by sequitor
@MatheinBoulomenos TIL
Nonsequited love
Er, unsequited
@Semiclassical I realize that such a number must always either end in 3 or 5 and any number ending in 5 (besides 5) cannot be prime, but I'm not sure how to prove that any number ending in 3 cannot be prime either
$\langle(x,1),(x,1)\rangle=1$ where we have an inner product on $\Bbb R^n\times\Bbb R$
works better
and that's just ellipse(oids) if it's an actual inner product
So yeah, in finite dimensions this is all easy. I imagine on infinite dimensions one can’t be so sanguine
22:50
Cheery
@krauser126 Plenty of numbers ending in 3 are prime.
Hi DogAteMy, @Semiclassic, @Mathein
@Semiclassical Oh is that a four humors sort of thing
22:51
@TedShifrin Yea I just checked and see that haha. Then I'm not sure what I'm missing here.
DogAteMy: One of my advisees from years ago at UGA (who ended up a CS major) just sent me a quote from you on quora.
Try looking at the factors of your first few examples
@krauser: I missed the original discussion.
Blood makes you cheery (unless it's somewhere visible, in which case something's gone horribly wrong)
@Semiclassical Yes.
22:52
@TedShifrin What did I say?
(Oh no)
Said I was pissed off at publishers' prices and refused to publish my diff geo text with any.
He was amused to run across my name.
Reddit, not Quora
Main reason I ask is because I’ve got a Von Neumann paper on the brain
From like...1927?
22:53
Oh, Reddit. Not that I pay attention.
Yeah it was a good thing you did
I still get emails from different publishers. I say I'm dead and retired.
@AkivaWeinberger Only the quadratic part thereof. :)
I guess I shouldn't scroll back and read stuff.
So have you started at Yale?
@TedShifrin Yeah
22:54
Anything exciting? Neat people?
People are nice
What level math courses did you stick yourself in?
I think it should come down to something like this: the only sensible inner products on Hermitian matrices are Hilbert-Schmidt up to an overall weight
@TedShifrin Trying to figure out why 4^a - 1 can never be prime. I wrote out the first few numbers and realize their digits always add up to a number that's divisible by 3, therefore they're all divisible by 3.
Sensible?
22:55
Math 230 - a proof-based multivariable course
Given a > 1
That's the course that used to use my text every year.
Possibly too easy but it probably makes sense for me to be forced to sit down and write proofs on paper
Feel free to cut that down to -only- if that’s true
@krauser: Yes, mod 3 arithmetic wins. 4^a is the same as 1^a.
22:56
@krauser126 a=1 also works
Has nothing to do with the last digit. Only divisibility.
I’m used to inner products of (column) vectors
4^1 - 1 = 3 though. Which is prime @AkivaWeinberger
one thing that generalizes some part of this is the following lemma I learned in functional analysis. Let $(V,\langle -,-\rangle)$ be a real Hilbert space and let $s:V \times V \to \Bbb R$ be a bounded bilinear form in the sense that $|s(v,w)| \leq C \|v\|\|w\|$ for some $C$ independent of $v$ and $w$, then there is a unique bounded operator $A:V \to V$ such that $s(v,w)=\langle v,Aw\rangle$
If $s$ is actually an inner product, then we get that $A$ is orthogonal and positive definite
22:57
DogAteMy: I would probably have stuck you in something more advanced, but you didn't really learn everything in my book thoroughly. What book are they using now?
But it's divisible by 3, which is what I thought you meant
Not sure, he mentioned a text but said we didn't need to get it
3 divides 4^a-1 is the real pattern in my book
The fact that 4^a-1 can’t be prime if a>1 is just a corollary of that
I will support Semiclassic in that which he utters.
@TedShifrin Could you explain how you concluded that 4^a is the same as 1^a. Are you saying that 4^a mod 3 always equals 1^a = 1 ?
22:59
That said, you should have something (boring) to say about prime numbers which are 1 less than a power :)
Because 4 mod 3 is 1. And modular arithmetic respects addition and multiplication. That's why it's so wonderful :)
00:00 - 23:0023:00 - 00:00

« first day (3318 days earlier)      last day (1999 days later) »