« first day (4596 days earlier)      last day (721 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

00:22
Found a way to prove it
It should be obvious why $DE=CE$ right?
00:46
@copper.hat phbhtpphbt
@leslietownes that should be lorem ipsum phbhtpphbt
Godbless the prodigal genius of Stephen Wolfram...🙏🏿
 
1 hour later…
01:54
@冥王Hades depends on what is given
Nvm, I see the original
02:09
Hi @robjohn!
03:03
So, I have this PDE that I'm trying to solve, but I have not idea how to even begin trying to tackle it: $x_i-\frac{f(x)f_{x_i}(x)}{\vert\nabla f(x)\vert^2}=c_i(x)$ (notation clarification: $x=(x_i)_{i\in[n]}$ and $f_{x_i}(x)$ is the partial of $f$ with respect to $x_i$)
Where would I look to try and solve something like that? (Or is trying to solve that particular equation going to be a very difficult${}^{\text{TM}}$ task?)
Question about an example. A vector field $V$ along a curve $\gamma$ is a continuous map such that $V(t) \in T_\gamma M.$ If $N(t) = R\gamma'(t)$ where $R$ is rotation by 90 degrees and $N(t) = (-\gamma^{2'},\gamma^{1'})$, then it is a smooth vector field along $\gamma.$ Why $N$ a vector field along $\gamma$? What part of it shows it is in the tangent space of $\gamma$?
IN fact since $N$ is normal to the tangent velocity vector, shouldn't this be in the normal space?
03:25
@TedShifrin hey there.
Nobody say hi to Me ;_;
03:55
@Lemon Yes, it it’s a vector field on $\gamma$ in the usual calculus sense. It’s a section of the tangent bundle of the ambient manifold along $\gamma$.
@Rithaniel think about the second term and the product rule (so integration by parts). The rest is easy.
@TedShifrin Oh, it's been a while since I've looked at that one, but I think I can see the idea
What gives $f_i/|\nabla f|^2$ when differentiated?
Still not sure if it’s solvable easily, but that’s a start.
Oh, I’m wrong.
Ignore it all. Where did this come from?
This is me trying to find a function for a surface satisfying some properties in some original research. The idea is for $c(x)$ to be a vector-valued function from a space to itself, and to then define a surface such that the tangent line along the direction of the gradient at a point $x$ intersects the plane at $c(x)$
04:11
@TedShifrin sorry what is the calculus sense here? I am staring at $N$ and it is normal to the tangent vector field $(\gamma^{1'},\gamma^{2'})$, shouldn't it be in the normal space of $\gamma$?
04:23
(The idea is to then look at the behavior of this surface at points where $c(x)$ is not defined)
@Lemon yes, sure, it’s normal to the plane curve.
@Rithaniel This doesn’t make sense to me.
(Actually, yeah, I'm now realizing that I don't really need this surface. I just got fixated on it because it's a cool concrete thing)
Do this in the plane to start.
Looking at $f(x,y)$ with precisely what geometric property?
Well, yeah, I have an example. $f(x)=\sqrt{1-x^2}$ and $c(x)=\frac{1}{x}$. The tangent line at $x$ intersects the $x$-axis at $\frac{1}{x}$
04:31
Then at $x=0$, the tangent line is completely horizontal
Dimensions don’t line up. So you’re looking at $y=f(x)$. The tangent line to the graph? So the graph lives in one more dimension than the function.
So this is like Newton’s method ….
But the idea is to eliminate the $(n+1)$-th dimension by extending the tangent line until it hits $\mathbb{R}^n$
@TedShifrin Oh crap, I think it is
@TedShifrin That's what I don't get. If it is normal, then it is not in the tangent space of $\gamma$, it is in a different space. So $N$ cannot be a smooth vector field along $\gamma.$
04:36
I already said you’re using a restrictive definition of vector field. Go back to calc 3.
The tangent bundle of the ambient space is a fine bundle. So is the normal bundle.
@Rithaniel your formula makes sense for a function of a single variable, but not for more. To do Newton we need a function $\Bbb R^2\to\Bbb R^2$, not to $\Bbb R$.
I don’t understand your equation for $n=2$..
So, an example for my idea in $n=2$ would be the upper half of the unit sphere. The tangent line along the direction of the gradient at a point $(x,y)$ where $x^2+y^2<1$ should then intersect the plane at the inverse point with respect to the unit circle
The idea is that the tangent vector along the gradient direction can be expressed by $(\frac{\nabla f}{\vert\nabla f\vert},\vert\nabla f\vert)$, and then you simply scale it by $\frac{f(x)}{\vert\nabla f\vert}$ and add it to $(x,f(x))$
So in higher dimensions, you’re only specifying a 2D slice at each point.
I think this is very underdetermined if you expect these data to give you back $f$.
That's right. One for the direction of the tangent vector and one for the "additional dimension"
@TedShifrin Alright, so there might be several functions, depending on the form of the $c(x)$ in question?
04:52
It’s like a partial envelope somehow.
I'll look up partial envelopes, then
Or none.
No, I made that up. Envelope is a thing.
Alright, then I will look up envelopes
I have answered several posts about them .
its an abstract semi partial envelope form
04:54
I would recommend that you decide what’s going on in the 1D case before going to 2. Forget $n$.
Copper is acting like leslie.
While leslie is acting like ?
Who knows.
Ted, just for practice and to get a feel of things, I was trying to show that $f(x,y) = xy$ was integrable over the region where $y = x$ and $y = x^2$ intersect. Like from your lecture Day 5 - 3510. I was attempting to use the $\epsilon$ -critetion i.e "critical criterion" to show this. But probably not surprising I'm having toruble creating my upper and lower sums
05:13
Yuck.
Too yuck to construct reasonably?
Creating your own examples before mastering the lecture examples is generally considered a dangerous practice.
I gave
Why do we still say oh my God even when we are atheist?
Idiomatic.
05:17
Stick to the exercises in the book, DC.
I’m not in favor of redoing all the Riemann sum crap from single variable when there is good theory to use.
Fiiiiiinnnneeee................. I was motivated to do it because I want to see how to break iterated integrals like you gave in the table at the end of Day 5
@TedShifrin I am not sure what in Calc 3 I need to revisit. I know the general definition of a vector field uses sections. But what i mean here is that $N$ would be section to the normal projection $\pi: NM \to M.$ The example says smooth vector field, which I assume means smooth tangent vector field.
Why do you assume that when it clearly is not?
@D.C.theIII Those were all on rectangles and different examples of pathology.
Because the original definition of a smooth vector field $V$ along $\gamma$ is $V(t) \in T_\gamma M$. So when they say $N$ is a smooth vector field along $\gamma$, I thought they mean $N(t) \in T_\gamma M$
agreed....I just flew too close to the sun before I have the protection (skill set)
05:26
Never look into the eyes of the sun.
@TedShifrin I thought that the OP was correct. But it seems that not
Better read more carefully for context, Lemon.
The answer has been posted already there.
The answer shows that both the fields are isomorphic.
@user2236 killing it with the sage words tonight
I don’t know what the OP said, but the two situations are very much not anslogous. Different roots of the same irreducible means isomorphic.
Right, as I just said.
05:29
Yeah. I thought that since in Q(i 2^{1/4}), we have an x such that $x^2$ is negative, but in Q(2^{1/4}), there is no element whose square is negative.
So they should not be isomorphic.
I wrote this in my exam also few days ago 😅
Why is negative relevant?
But it is wrong,I see it now.
Do isomorphisms preserve sign? In complex cases, what is sign?
No idea :(
Yeah, not meaningful.
You have to look for equations that elements satisfy and see that they correspond.
Like adjoining $\sqrt2$ as opposed to $\sqrt3$ or $\root3\of 2$.
06:34
This is really smart move imo
I finally know why ramanujan was smarter than rest of the mathematician
anyway back to learn my statistics and probability course
cya chat :)
btw this is story about sage and student clever schemes from Indian literature
as I got interested with the guy who said now I become death
destroyer of world from sanskrit
even top scientist learn from Indian literature
07:05
@copper.hat as i am on a bouded set if $q\in L^{\infty}$ then $1/q$ also is essentially bounded
07:30
@Vrouvrou how is ${1 \over x}$ essentially bounded on $(0,1)$????
07:44
3
Q: Smash product of X with $S^1$ (Example 0.10 in Hatcher's)

KoroMy first question/confusion is regarding the definition of reduced suspension $\sum X$ and suspension $SX$ of a space $X$. Usually, we denote the quotient space of $X$ with subspace $A$ identified to a point as $X/A$. I understand that suspension of a space is like a 'double-cone': we take a spac...

Suppose that I have a space X, and I quotient it by subspaces $A_1, A_2,...,A_n$. Does it matter in what order I do?
Define $Z(k_1,k_2,...,k_n): ((X/A_{k_1})/A_{k_2})/.../A_{k_n}$
Is $Z(1,2,...,n)$ the same as $Z(\sigma)$, where $\sigma \in S_n$?
08:11
Algebraic topology seems to be very non rigorous subject to me.
I mean the subject where rigor is not required.
Handwaving and memorizing seems to be the way forward in this subject.
0
Q: Order of quotienting by subspaces to form a quotient space

KoroContext/Background: Often it is asked in some exams - what is the space obtained by collapsing meridional and longitudinal circle of a Mobius strip or similar type of things. When I look at the solutions available, they usually start with a rectangle, then do identifications in an order that is d...

08:53
@Koro congrats for hitting 10k rep
@Koro I think $A_i$'s should be disjoint so that $X^n_\sigma$ makes sense. I remember we usually assume $A$ is closed in $X$ to ensure some Hausdorffness of $X/A$.
09:12
can someone give me a hint how to find a single surface patch that covers the cylinder?
09:43
@SineoftheTime thanks :-)
@onepotatotwopotato I think you are right about disjointness. Hausdorffness is not my concern for the question. About disjointness: I want to identify A_i's with different points. So disjointness is needed in my case.
Thanks.
09:58
@onepotatotwopotato do you have any idea about my other question which is regarding smash product?
10:09
Recall that the quotient space $X/A$ is a set $(X-A)\cup\{A\}$ with the quotient topology for the map $p:X\to X/A$ taking points of $X-A$ to points of $X-A$ and points of $A$ to $\{A\}$.
Are you referring to my smash product question?
Yes. Considering $S^1$ as $I/\partial I$ will be helpful. In particular, $X\times S^1$ can be considered as $X\times I$ with $X\times\{0\}$ and $X\times\{1\}$ identified.
that's the part I am having difficulty with.
Why can one say that $X\times S^1=(X\times I)/(X\times 0\cup X\times 1)$?
We should have only: $X\times S^1=X\times I/\partial I$. Right?
and it seems to be that: $(X\times I)/(X\times 0\cup X\times 1)$ is not the same as $((X\times I)/X\times 0)/(X\times 1)$.
I have received an answer to the question but I don't understand it.
@Koro This is a problematic notation. It's quotienting out $X\times 0$ and $X\times 1$ from $X\times I$ not identifying $X\times 0$ and $X\times 1$. Consider $X = S^1$ case for example.
10:27
I don't understand.
I thought quotienting and identifying were the same thing.
10:40
Identifying here means $(x,0)\sim (x,1)$ for $x\in X$.
Quotienting means $(x,0)\sim (x,1)\sim *$ for $x\in X$.
 
2 hours later…
12:30
@robjohn Makes sense right?
12:43
hi @冥王Hades
haven't seen you in a while
13:04
@SineoftheTime What's up
Yeah I've been busy with classes
6
Q: Showing that an inclusion is null homotopic

Rudy the ReindeerI'm trying to do exercise 5 on page 18 in Hatcher: Show that if a space $X$ deformation retracts to a point $x \in X$, then for each neighborhood $U$ of $x$ in $X$ there exists a neighborhood $V \subset U$ of $x$ such that the inclusion map $V \rightarrow U$ is nullhomotopic. My question: Does...

How to prove that the inclusion is null homotopic?
0
Q: Show that the inclusion $V \to U$ is nullhomotopic.

Ri-LiShow that if a space $X$ is deformation retract to a point $x \in X$, then for each neighbourhood $U$ of $x$ $\exists$ a neighbourhood $V \subset U$ of $x$ s.t the inclusion $V \to U$ is nullhomotopic. Now considering the deformation retract $f: X \times I \to X$ if we just restrict $X$ to $U$ t...

nvm, I got it now.
@冥王Hades me too, new semester :)
 
1 hour later…
14:23
math.stackexchange.com/questions/3572400/… Can anyone please explain how do they conclude f=f' ? Also what's Leibniz rule (I think as the user mentions in OP, they are concluding that using this rule) ? I tried googling it,but it returns some crazy equation formula involving partial differentiation, which seems to have no utility in solving the problem , so I think the search query is insufficient in my cause!
14:34
Maximilian my old friend :)
Now what does that mean 🤔?!?
Sadly my real analysis is bit rusty :( I am not as bright as Maximilian
@NotTfue But who is this Maxmilian ?!???
I don't have a clue.
Or is that a joke 😂 😂 😂
14:58
@Franklin take the derivative of both sides
15:17
@SineoftheTime But what is $\frac{d(\int _0^x f(t)dt)}{dx}$ ? I can't seem to evaluate this since it's a definitite integral not an indefinite one! Is $\frac{d(\int _0^xf(t)dt)}{dx}=f(x)$ ? If so, then why?
How to show this sequence $(x_{n}) = (1-\frac{1}{n})^n $ is monotone increasing
@nickbros123 Show the derivative strictly positive
That 'll suffice
And that's trivially true since $n\in\Bbb N$
15:52
There is one existence and uniqueness theorem for system of ODEs which says Suppose $y'=Ay+f, y(x_0)=y_0$ be a IVP and each components of $A,f$ are measurable and locally integrable then the IVP has a unique solution $y$ whose components are absolutely continuous.
Does anyone have notes or any references
And the domain is $(a,b)$.
But is it true in $\mathbb R$?
16:08
@Franklin yes. it is one of the versions of something often called, somewhat unhelpfully, "the fundamental theorem of calculus"
does someone knows about dynamical systems?
in particular semiconjugacies?
@leslietownes Is this theorem you are talking about ?
that is a version of it, yes.
@leslietownes Is there any other version?
i'm afraid to say, yes. e.g. for functions more general than continuous functions. don't worry about it.
finding the most general 'fundamental theorem of calculus' is a waste of time that has preoccupied too many people.
we can ask whether it's a good idea to refer to something that exists in multiple forms as "the" fundamental theorem of calculus, but we're kind of stuck with it.
16:19
@leslietownes 😂😂😂😂 That definitely clears it up! The takeaway is : The picture (I posted) is the thing one must use to solve problems like that .
is this the cue to bring up henstock-kurzweil
the mathworld version is certainly enough for the problem you linked to earlier. you'd find some version of it in most calculus textbooks, although as that image suggests, sometimes books will say this is the 'first form' or the 'second FTC' and on and on.
@leslietownes 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I get it! Thanks a lot!!!
thorgott: it would be, if those folks needed a cue, which they tend not to
math.stackexchange.com/questions/3572400/… question 2: how is f(0)=0 ( as every answer suggests) ?
Can anyone please help me with this ? Cause' I think I am missing something huge !?
16:29
the integral from 0 to 0 of f is 0.
it's from the integral formula.
@leslietownes Ok, I do get it now. Actually, I have just started integration and the elementary formulas. Yes, the point is then $\int _0^0 f(x)=0$ for every real function f(x)(although very obvious though!) . But I do have to learn how to prove all these stuffs rigorously as the course proceeds 😂😂😂
yeah, definitely, although that particular result is likely to be very close to a definition.
16:45
Recently say someone here mention about AI.
20
Q: What areas of math can be tackled by artificial intelligence?

badmfArtificial intelligence is nearing, with image/speech recognition, chess/go engines etc. My question is, what areas of math that are interesting to mathematicians, is likely to be the first to be able to be tackled by artificial intelligence? Is there some areas of math where some open conjecture...

I wonder how much research has progressed I hope someone can update answer here.
@Franklin does the derivative test work for sequences? (Forgive me if i sound ignorant, my real analysis course hasn't started differentiation yet)
i haven't clicked through, but i think there could be room for AI in more fruitfully exploring search spaces that are known to be "small" already. combinatorics is full of minimization problems where, in some cases, good results are known but are not expected to be the best result. but this is also an area which isn't exactly a research frontier, sometimes people categorize this stuff as recreational mathematics.
@Koro sorry for late reply "No, I asked pre-image of the emptyset $\emptyset$, which is an element of $P(\mathbb N)$ so for surjectivity, you need to have a preimage for that. No?" Yes you are right. I accidentally thought preimage as element not set.
@nickbros123 yes ofc! To answer your question in a crude way: iff $f(x) $ is continuous in a particular interval and if f'(x)>0 in that interval then f(x) is a monotonically increasing function and since a sequence is nothing but a mapping from N to R so...
yes. there is some care there, however, as a single sequence can 'fit' a bunch of different functions of a real variable, and replacing n with x is sometimes not the only thing worth doing.
but if your sequence a_n does take the form f(n) where f(x) is differentiable and has positive derivative or whatever... that's a powerful tool.
a related tactic is forming the difference a_{n+1} - a_n or the quotient a_{n+1}/a_n and seeing if you can prove those are positive or greater than 1, respectively.
17:08
@Franklin fundamental theorem of calculus :)
How to find a general solution for $\sin(\pi \cos x) = 0$? I see when $\cos(x)$ is an integer, $\sin(\pi \cos(x))$ will be $0$. So $x$ should be an integral multiple of $\pi/2$. But this desmos graph shows that the solutions are only odd multiple of $\pi/2$. Why?
software bug, maybe.
@Franklin Just an old friend of mine :)
Is my solution right?
utkarsh, yes, sin (pi cos(x)) will be 0 whenever cos(x) is an integer, even if that integer is an even integer.
i misspoke, but you know what i mean.
17:12
@leslietownes Okay. Thanks for the verification! :D
for example, sin(pi cos(0)) is definitely 0.
Ohh
Then I think I'm wrong.
OK, i see you've excluded x = 0 from the graph. but in the graph you linked, i guess i'd expect to see red lines at multiples of pi. sin(pi cos(pi)) is 0.
@leslietownes Yes. cos(x) can be either -1, 0 or 1 for the sine function to be 0. cos(x) attains integral value only on the integral multiples of pi/2.
stuff like this sometimes sheds indirect information on how these functions are implemented in software. but i don't know what error might be happening here.
17:16
Oh
And how to find general solution for cos(2pi sin(x)) = 0?
same approach as the other one. cos(2pi __) is 0 when __ is bleh. identify the x for which sin x is bleh.
cos(2pi sin(x)) = 0 when 2pi sin(x) is a multiple of pi/2 i.e. 2sin(x) is a multiple of 1/2 or sin(x) is a multiple of 1/4.
How to find such x?
sin(x) = 1/4?
doesn't seem like it would have a "nice" solution.
Hmm badly sad.
I was solving this question
And these are the choices given.
 
1 hour later…
18:31
I have to select some electives for the next semester.
Considering how terrible they teach here, I don't wish to take topology.
Even though I am tempted to take it.
@shintuku: how is game theory, Markov chains?
Set theory, mathematical logic sound fine.
Mad
Mad
i havent had statsitics, so i have a question, if an event has a chance of 1% to happen each year, how likely it is to happen in the span of 10 years?
whats the formula to calculate this probability?
game theory sounds nice.
Please give suggestions about game theory, set theory and mathematical logic.
I think it'll be best for me if I study Fourier analysis, topology etc. on my own.
Taking these at my college will only ruin my grades.
considering the below average teaching of teachers here.
i've only done game theory in microeconomics class, so super informally
i'll be dealing with markov chains for stochastic diff equations eventually
Non-Cooperative Games: Games in normal form. Rationalizability and iterated
deletion of never-best responses. Nash equilibrium: existence, properties and
applications. Two-person Zero Sum Games. Games in extensive form: perfect
recall and behavoiour strategies. Credibility and Subgame. Perfect Nash
equilibrium. Bargaining. Repeated Games; Folk Theorems.
Introduction to Cooperative Games (TU Games).
This is the syllabus for game theory.
18:47
if you have to choose between game theory and markov chains, recalling that you said you wanted to eventually do astrophysics stuff, i think markov chains has a higher likelihood of being useful in that area
probably some quantum mechanics usage for markov chains out there
shin: the idea is I expect nothing from professors here. So I assume they are not here. In such a situation, I have say a semesters time. Now, I want my grades to be fine. So I think that the subjects that I mentioned above (Game theory, set theory, mathematical logic) have less syllabus.
And I think that I should be able to self study them within that time.
tons of lectures about set theory and mathematical logic online
haven't found game theory lectures though
there is a combinatorial game theory course on NPTEL i think
I like set theory, mathematical logic by the way. I have tried to express this time and again during my interaction with @user21820 as well.
@shintuku Ohh
But the syllabus doesn't seem much.
What about advanced fluid dynamics?
and any idea about ergodic theory?
19:04
that one sounds cool
a couple of applications in economics
not a physics guy myself so no clue about fluid dynamics
syllabus seems too much though 🥲
analytical mechanics sounds nice as well
probably has applications in planet gravity equilibrium stuff too, ergodic theory
shin: I can always study it outside college. At my college, it's all about marks.
If it weren't, I would take Riemann surfaces, Differential topology, Differential geometry etc.
heheh
haha
I know how it sounds 😅
I think I'll take differential topology as well anyways.
There is Quantum mechanics too.
19:10
💪
But the syllabus is huge so I know what they will do in class in the name of teaching.
ohoo, and what is convex geometry?
lots of application for optimization problems
used a lot in microeconomics
but also in operations research, from what i've heard
copperhat is household expert
oh I see.
Any idea about advanced linear algebra?
Here is the syllabus:
Majorization and doubly stochastic matrices. Matrix Decomposition Theorems
(Polar, QR, LR, SVD etc.) and their applications. Perturbation Theory.
• Nonnegative matrices and their applications. Wavelets and the Fast Fourier
Transform. Basic ideas of matrix computations.
requesting @leslietownes's view on this one.
@Koro if you like calculus, take Fourier analysis. Don't let a stupid professor ruin your future
@SineoftheTime: Oh, please note that it doesn't ruin future.
As I said, I can study them on my own.
19:24
sure
The point is to score marks and keep a good score.
but why'd you choose an elective on the base of the teacher
I'm not.
does your uni have a physics or math student association koro?
See, the point is: if there is too much syllabus at my hands, then my exams may ruin considering the timespan of a semester.
But if the syllabus is less, I should be able to complete the syllabus.
19:26
yes, but if you like calculus (you enjoyed functional analysis right?), consider taking Fourier analysis
This gives me a better chance to score marks.
Don't know how works your uni
@SineoftheTime the syllabus is huge so they will rush everything in the name of teaching.
And my syllabus (personal, which is independent of teacher in class) won't be complete in time (semester).
@shintuku no :(
@SineoftheTime yes, I like FA.
19:29
usually the best place for teaching quality gossip
there used to be student clubs at the college where I did my UG from.
1
Q: Number of connected components for the filled julia set of $z^2 + c z^5$

mickFor any polynomial map $f$ we can define the filled Julia $K$ to be closure of the complement of $ \Omega$ in $\mathbb{C}$ of the basin of infinity $$\Omega = \{z \in \mathbb{C}; f^{\circ n}(z)\rightarrow \infty \}.$$ Thus the boundary of $K$ is what is often called the Julia set. Now there are e...

hi all
any help welcome
@Koro in general, also for the future (PhD), it's important to have a coherent "way"
@SineoftheTime I know how it sounds. But that's the way it is, sadly.
@mick hi Chuck
19:31
@SineoftheTime I'll not do Ph.D.
@SineoftheTime hi sine
If I were to do, it would be from Europe or US.
or it won't be.
@Koro : then maybe you'll have time to study on your own, as you've said
indeed.
apart from the question i posted , I read on philo and I must say I have an issue ;
if a philosofer and a expert in subject A disagree about the philoshy of A , who wins ??
19:33
expert?
the question sounds nice though :-).
YEAh say a mathematician and philo disagree on the philo of math
who wins
mathematician
both lose because they're wasting their time
I say mathematicians always win
@shintuku haha
shintuku wins
19:34
a lot of philosophy is non sense
@shintuku mortals always waste time
@SineoftheTime haha. Why?
it all depends on how you define "philosophy"
philosophically, heavier objects fall faster?
I forgot who said that. 🤔
19:40
@SineoftheTime as the empty set
@mick that's nice, I'll definitely tell this to my philosopher friend
its equally usefull but the fans love it
@SineoftheTime do that
@mick for sure ;)
;)
anyways im not really a fan of philos nor the empty set
to be brutally honest
@copper.hat you are right yes thank you
19:45
@mick at least the empty set is useful
@Vrouvrou hi
hello
@SineoftheTime barely , it is the set of solutions when there is no solution, thats it. its is just an empty box
sets are just boxes
it has its utility in abstract algebra
@SineoftheTime explain
19:48
empty sets can be used to construct the set of natural numbers.
@mick after centuries, you solved the question: what is a set?
in my abstract algebra i never used the empty set
@SineoftheTime yeah , i got bored. then solved it
@Koro but i do not need the empty set for that
yeah
it's important also in topology
i can associate the integers by the amount of empty boxes but so what
19:50
there is no topology without emptyset.
if you define it based on empty sets sure
I mean a topology on a set must contain the empty set by definition.
that is a definition , not a necc application. in fact a self-ref definition even
ohh. You hate emptyset 😅
@mick how would you define it?
19:53
@Koro yeah :)
@Koro therefore he hates philosophers
the empty set has no opposite , yet minus 0 = 0 :)
SO defining empty as 0 is tss
refering to defining the empty set as zero to build integers
@SineoftheTime the empty set is an empty box
sets are boxes without repetition
so boxes containing all boxes not containing themselves or containing 3 two times etc are not sets
@mick what's a box?
look {1,{2,3}}
the big box contains 1 and the box {2,3} ( the box with 2 and 3 )
we both know that this's not a rigorous definition of "box"
19:58
{{},1}
the big box contains the small empty box {} and 1.
Now consider forgetting about the sizes of boxes and remember sets are boxes without repetition
TO DO LIST : use empty boxes or empty sets to solve the prime twin conjecture.
nobody will.
you're definitely not an algebraist
it is just too weak
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (4596 days earlier)      last day (721 days later) »