« first day (3514 days earlier)      last day (1802 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

19:01
That's correct, but we should be able to argue this precisely. Suppose $[\sigma] \in p_* \pi_1(\widetilde{X}) \leq \pi_1(X)$, then certainly $\sigma$ is image of some loop in $\widetilde{X}$ by $p$, let us call that loop $\Sigma$.
Suppose there is another lift to a path $\gamma$ in $\widetilde{X}$ which is potentially a non-loop.
Both $\gamma$ and $\Sigma$ start at $\widetilde{x_0}$ by construction (I fudged the basepoint earlier). But we know a loop downstair lifts to a unique path upstairs starting at a given point.
So then endpoint of $\gamma$ is the endpoint of $\Sigma$ is $\widetilde{x_0}$.
Here we are using the "unique path lifting property" of covering spaces, notably.
I see.
And on a related note, the converse is trivially true.
@LeakyNun
in Research of sums of quotients and sums of remainders, 7 mins ago, by Ante
if $o(m)$ is the number of odd terms of $d(n)$ in the range $1 \leq n \leq m$ what is $\displaystyle \lim_{m \to + \infty} \frac {o(m)}{m}$ equal to?

@Mathphile @Peter
That is $p_*\pi_1(\widetilde X)$ precisely contains classes of those loops whose lift is again a loop.
@BalarkaSen
That's right.
The uniqueness of lifting essentially tells you there is only one lift once you fix a starting point, alternatively, $p_*$ is an injection (this is a little more, because you're saying homotopic loops lift to homotopic loops, but this homotopy is also unique, etc)
Just as a side-remark
I was really lost with what Hatcher says to argue that the lift of the loop that we constructed is again a loop.
19:10
Hi @TedShifrin. How are you?
@BalarkaSen How does this imply that the end-points of $\widetilde{f\circ\gamma}$ and $\widetilde{f\circ\gamma'}$ are the same?
ornek kanka mesela $2^2=4$
@sevdaicmis What?
@feynhat There is a unique lift of $f \circ \gamma$ and $f \circ \gamma'$ in $\widetilde{X}$ starting at $\widetilde{x_0}$. Your argument tells that $(f \circ \gamma) * \overline{f \circ \gamma'}$ lifts to a loop in $\widetilde{X}$. That forces the unique lifts of $f \circ \gamma$ and $f \circ \gamma'$ to have equal endpoints, right?
19:14
@feynhat i was talking to my friend
$(f\circ g)(x)$
The endpoint of $\widetilde{f \circ \gamma}$ and $\widetilde{f \circ \gamma'}$ being the value of $\widetilde{(f \circ \gamma) * \overline{f \circ \gamma'}}$ at time $t = 1/2$.
Hi, a Balarka. Hiding out at a friend's house, missing my computer among other things.
How're you doing?
@TedShifrin It's very scary
Hi, demonic Alessandro.
I am back at home. Classes suspended till 2 weeks, could extend
This is full-blown apocalypse.
19:18
Most schools and universities are over with in-person classes here.
Yes, it sure is, especially for us old at-risk folks.
the rise in gun sales is alarming
@BalarkaSen I see. Is the following true: Suppose $p : (\widetilde X, \widetilde x_0) \to (X,x_0)$ is a covering map. $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are paths starting at $x_0$ and have same endpoints, so that $\gamma = \alpha * \bar \beta$ is a loop. Suppose the lift $\widetilde \gamma$ of $\gamma$ is also a loop, then $\widetilde \alpha(1) = \widetilde \beta(1)$.
Stupid Chinese president and US president. Their lies messing up the world big-time.
Hi skull.
@feynhat That's correct.
when super powers fight we all suffer
@TedShifrin Hi
19:22
@TedShifrin Never thought I'd see end of the world in my lifetime. This had to happen, but it's happening too fast
ugh... Mathjax has problem with bars and tildes. The second $\beta$ was with a bar, and the third one was with a tilde. I hope you were able to make that out @BalarkaSen. I can't see any difference in my browser.
Yeah I can see it
@BalarkaSen When were you asked to leave?
I dunno, a Balarka.
19:24
@feynhat A couple days ago, on last Friday
Some guy died in Karnataka, and everyone panicked and shut stuff down for a week. Now suddenly the affected number is 150 and hiking
This will only go worse in the next 4 weeks and there's no way to stop an avalanche in India
the numbers a too huge
It's so densely populated and we have so little resources. The test kits can only test 1 in 100 people
Italian hospitals are over flowing
I still have no idea how testing happens where I am. If ....
The British government has frozen mortagage payments but haven't frozen rent for renters, so those people who own a house get a few months mortagage payment free while those renting the houses still have to pay their landlord, and AT THE SAME TIME haven't done anything to increase sick pay in the UK, but still forcing everyone to take time off work on 94 GBP a week
19:29
Glad to see Alessandro :)
Hi Edward
Hiya @TedShifrin
I gotta say that was a poorly formulate paragraph
but y'all get the jist, the UK government are absolute scum
Dude these people still think it's a joke
Insanity.
this is just the beginning
19:37
Doubtless blind followers of our incompetent leadership.
@TedShifrin Still alive!
Even though I keep studying PDEs those days so I don't know how long I'll survive like that
@BalarkaSen I saw you were one of the students selected for VSRP. Were you planning on going there (before all COVID nonsense broke out)?
Yes. VSRP might get cancelled this year.
Section 144 is activated
They sent an email saying they'll let us know what they're going to do in 10 days
19:46
Before that, did they ask you to email your areas of interest to the coordinators?
Yes, which I did. Are you one of the candidates?
Yes, I was selected in Batch-2.
Oh ok. Congrats.
Thought you must be a strong candidate, don't see undergrads from India reading algebraic topology much.
@BalarkaSen You too. But its too late I guess.
Yeah I have no idea what's going to happen
19:51
in The h Bar, 20 hours ago, by Sir Cumference
user image
2
come on, you guys are the best and brightest :-)
What area of interest did you tell them? Did you give them a preference for you wanted to work under? I don't see anyone there who works in algebraic topology. @BalarkaSen
I said geometry & topology.
TIFR has an active and growing geometry & topology group, despite it being full of algebraic geometers.
20:05
Hi, can someone explain to me the equation i marked? $x,y $ are just elements in some complex unital algebra
@infinity Just write the term for k=0 separately, which is 1.
$\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}(yx)^k=1+\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}(yx)^{k+1}=...$
And $(yx)^{k+1}=y(xy)^kx$
does this assume the algebra is commutative?
No
$(yx)^3=yxyxyx=y(xyxy)x=y(xy)^2x$ for example
20:09
Oh.
you are right, thanks!
3 hours ago, by Simple
Prove that there exists a set $A\subset\mathbb{R}$ such that $m^{*}(G\setminus\,A)=\infty$ for every open set $G$ contains $A$
I am still a bit not sure about how to use a non-measure set
Any tikz expert around by any chance?
20:31
I just export from Geogebra hehehehe
geogebra is pretty great
I need tikz, not tikzcd :/
I once created a Galois correspondence with tikz
took me over an hour
20:33
I'm still procrastinating by doing drawings for my thesis :P
@Alessandro is the thing you wanna draw doable in Geogebra? :P
Hmm not sure
But I'd prefer everything to be done directly in LaTeX instead of fumbling around with many programs and importing PNGs
You can export tikz directly out of Geogebra and just copy paste the code into a LaTeX compiler
which is how I've always draw diagrams, unless it was a commutative diagram in which case I use the thing that @Balarka linked
Oh that's neat
I'm using mathcha now which is an online editor that exports to tikz too
and if any tinkering was to be done with the image you can just tinker it inside the compiler
ah nice
anyway gotta run
20:38
cya
take care
21:03
I never ever did LaTeX graphics. I imported everything in postscript from Illustrator or Mathematica.
@TedShifrin have you watched The Man Who Knew Infinity?
I forget.
21:24
is there a sequence $(f_n)$ defined on $[a,b]$ such that every $f_i$ is Riemann-integrable and $\lim f_n=f$ exists pointwise at every point in $[a,b]$ but $f$ is not Riemann-integrable on $[a,b]$?
Yes @Ante
You can even use continuous $f_n$
@AlessandroCodenotti is there a concept of convergence between pointwise and uniform?
I guess you can look at convergence in $p$ norms on $C([a,b])$, or weak convergence, not sure
21:47
@Simple what have you tried?
@Simple did you figure out the correct lemma to the previous one?
@LeakyNun yes, it's pretty simple
yeah?
what's your proof?
Hey @Leaky
Have you seen round two?
21:53
parts of it
wait wtf Giri drew???
That's what Giri does
Caruana played a really nice game
Caruana is scarily accurate, he was playing like an engine today
Giri was so losing the last time I saw the game
since Wang Hao created a passed b pawn
$\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R},(x,y)\mapsto xy$ is continuous, hence measurable
wtf why would Wang Hao trade
$E\in\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{T}$ and $x\in\,X$, $y\in\,Y$, $E^{x}\in\mathcal{T}$ where $E^{x}=\{y\in\,Y\,|\,(x,y)\in\,A\times\,B\}$
21:56
@LeakyNun Are you sure you're not mixing up games? MVL won with a passed B pawn against Ding
no I'm not mixing up games
look at the game
oh wow MVL also has a passed B pawn? lol
@LeakyNun yeah that's why I asked
looks like I should create more passed b pawns in my games then :P
Wang Hao was also down on time iirc, I guess he didn't see a way to convert
what an upset
21:58
Even stockfish was saying +2 at most but saw no clearly winning line
such disappointment
I mean +2 is usually converted at that level, but maybe this time it was too hard
a passed pawn!
Do I infer you're rooting for Wang Hao to win?
no it was just that he was winning and couldn't win
I root for nobody
21:59
Fair enough
I'd be happy with either Caruana or Grischuk winning
yeah Giri blocked with the knight and then Wang Hao couldn't do Vishwanothing
But I think a Nepo-Carlsen match would also be very interesting
and then it ended with a perpetual
Ah I see
I didn't watch the end, I only watched up to the end of the other three games, which happened relatively early
I only watched parts of the finegold stream
and he was like, Wang Hao is winning rawr!
22:03
Also I finally reached 1700 on lichess in blitz, this quarantine is great for my elo haha
play?
@loch I don't know how to start actually, I am not sure how to do the preimage
hmm, the Berlin endgame was a draw between Nepo and Grischuk
maybe don't go to the Berlin endgame next time :P
Not now, I'm getting some work done for once
(a very rare occurence)
22:09
skeptical that Alessandro gets work done
@Simple you shouldn't really need to worry about the preimage - ie using properties you know about measurable functions should be enough
@TedShifrin I'm actually writing my thesis (to procrastinate on studying PDEs)
LOL, just so long as you're procrastinating
@loch product of measurable functions is measurable
I call it productive procrastination
22:13
ParTial Stochastic Differential Equations
PTSDEs
The problem is that I don't have a deadline for the PDEs exam with the coronavirus situation, so I don't feel the urge to study because time is running out
@BalarkaSen chess?
I wrote a bunch more stuff about pdes in the garbo room @Balarka
I have an online class tomorrow so I will sleep after a smoke
22:15
@knight stumbled across these and thought you might appreciate them:
Yup, @Alessandro, I saw. Still on my reading list.
I'm trying to compute forward and inverse fourier transform of $1_[0,1]$.
With what conventions?
trying is the first step to success!
$ F(f)(w) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-iwx}f(x)dx $
@Semiclassical
22:17
Fourier transforms are defined with so many conventions that I have to ask ahead of time which definition you’re using
Just installed Mathjax.
Is the inverse just with a sign flip in the exponent and integrating over w?
So: I want to compute the forward and backword transform of $ 1_{[0,1]} $
@Semiclassical yes.
@Semiclassical lmao asking the right questions
No, that's not right...
22:20
Ok. One thing I remember being weird about that convention (which I otherwise rather like) is how convolutions work
I like the convention that makes the operator norm of the Fourier transform work out to be $1$
I like the convention that comes from Tate's thesis
Namely, that the forward transform of a convolution is sqrt(2pi) times the product of the forward transforms
That sqrt(2pi) is a touch irritating
So $F(1_{[0, 1]})(w) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi} i}\frac{1 - e^{-iw}}{w} $
(If you replace $w$ with $k$, the forward transform amounts to going from a position-space representation to a momentum-space representation. Pretty sure it preserves the L2 norm, because that amounts to the normalization condition.)
22:25
looks accurate to me
What is usually the $L^1$-norm of a matrix? Is it $\|A\|_{L^1} = \max_{1 \leq i \leq n} \sum_{j = 1}^n |a_{ij}|$?
Think so yeah
Setting the result from before as $ g$: $ F^{-1}(g)(x) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{e^{ixw} - e^{iw(x-1)}}{w} dw $.
Now I'm stuck computing this integral.
This is the same thing as operator norm wrt the $L^1$-norm on the Euclidean space, right?
Tread carefully near the origin, yeah
22:28
$\|A\|_{L^1} = \sup_{\|x\| = 1} \|Ax\|_{L^1}/\|x\|_{L^1}$
@Balarka that one's induced by the infty-norm
the one induced by the 1-norm is summing columns instead
Ah right
@moteutsch use the Fourier inversion formula
instead of computing integrals you don't know
@moteutsch I suspect that the right way to do that is to split the integral in two
But in any case that implies $\|AB\|_{L^1} \leq \|A\|_{L^1} \|B\|_{L^1}$, right? Operator norm is submultiplicative.
22:31
Since whether you close the contour in the upper or lower half plane depends on the sign in the exponent
And the two terms need not agree on that
why people define $\inf\,f=0$ with $m^{*}E=\infty$ where $E$ is a measurable set and $\int\,f<\infty$
what does $E$ have to do with this question?
yes Balarka
Anyways, it’ll be residue theorem computations @moteutsch
22:34
@Semiclassical So for term $ e^{ixw}/w$ for example, what contour should I use?
Specifically, the case of a pole on the contour
@Semiclassical The trick I remember for evaluating integrals on R is to use the semi-circle.
that sounds right, but I remember this integral being a bit strange. One moment
The issue is that there is a pole on the real axis
I was asked to prove the following: Suppose $A$ is a "diagonally dominant" square matrix, i.e., $\|a_{ii}\| > \sum_{j = 1, j \neq i}^n \|a_{ij}\|$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$. Then $A$ is invertible. This is trivial from the norm stuff because $A = D + B$ where $D$ is the diagonal part, then $A = D(I + D^{-1} B)$ and $\|D^{-1} B\|_{L^1} < 1$. Now if $\|M\|_{L^1} = \varepsilon < 1$, then $I + M$ is invertible since $I - M + M^2 - \cdots$ is bounded in norm by $1/(1 - \varepsilon)$
We can use a Cauchyness argument to prove it converges.
Note that the same argument shows that in any unital Banach algebra the set of invertible elements is open
22:39
Good point
@LeakyNun sorry, i dont follow
@BalarkaSen what course is this
and why are you taking it
Numerical analysis. Dumb course, don't want to take it, but compulsory
22:42
$Ax=b$ is equivalent to $x=D^{-1}(b-Bx)$, which is a fixed point equation for the affine linear map $x\mapsto D^{-1}(b-Bx)$, which is a contraction, because $\lVert D^{-1}B\rVert<1$, hence conclude by Banach fixed point theorem
@Semiclassical Yeah, I'm not sure how to proceed :/
Nice steamroller, @Thorgott
I think I see what the problem is (though I don’t remember the solution)
that's actually how we proved it in the numerical analysis lecture I attended
I'm sure my instructor expects us to use some idiotic argument
Nobody knows proper analysis in my class
22:45
The function 1_0,1] is an antiderivative of difference of delta functions
Which means that we should expect the inverse Fourier transform to be a bit problematic
the more interesting thing is that "diagonally dominant matrices are invertible" is equivalent to the Gershgorin circle theorem
Oh what is that
Take a complex square matrix, look at one row, sum up the absolute values of all the elements in that row except the diagonal one, take that as radius of a circle whose center is the diagonal element in that row
the union of these circles contains all eigenvalues of the matrix
same works with columns if you look at the transpose instead
@moteutsch you may find it easier to consider the case of 1_[-1/2,1/2]
among other things, this directly implies that the spectral radius is smaller than the operator norms induced by both the 1- and the infty-norm
22:49
Due to the additional symmetry
@Semiclassical Frullani integral? I haven't read everything above, but it looks like that with extended limits.
That may work but I don’t remember frullani too well
In particular, the Fourier transform is just a sinc function
Which now has a removeable singularity at the origin
Rather than a simple pole
that looks uncomfortably involved
@Semiclassical Great, thanks a lot!
Good night
23:10
39 mins ago, by Simple
why people define $\inf\,f=0$ with $m^{*}E=\infty$ where $E$ is a measurable set and $\int\,f<\infty$
Suppose $f$ is a non-negative function, apply simple function to approximate it, we have
Let F be the set consisting of all numbers in [0,1] that do not contain a 1 nor a 7 in their decimal expansion
Easier to differentiate under the integral sign; which would be the same as Frullani integral I believe. Complex integration looks hard there.
is the hausdorff dimension of $F$, log8/log10?
23:12
$\int\,f=\int\sum\alpha_i\chi_{E_i}<\infty$, if one of $E_i$ has infinite measure, we need $\alpha_i=0$ so that $E_i$ vanish
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (3514 days earlier)      last day (1802 days later) »