« first day (929 days earlier)      last day (4391 days later) » 

08:02
@peoplepower <innocent> You want to know what books to run away from? </innocent>
category theory is awesome
even though i nearly know nothing about it
@BrianM.Scott I find nonsense interesting, got a problem with that? :P
2
@peoplepower I prefer other flavors of nonsense. :-)
@peoplepower What are your interests?
@AlexYoucis So far they have been set theory, logic, algebra though I have widely varying interests over time.
08:07
Cool dude. That's all good stuff.
I have a question about graph theory.
@AndrewSalmon You can try us; no guarantees, though.
Let $G = ( V , E )$ and let $E(T)$ denote the edges $E(T,V\setminus T)$.
Does $E( T \Delta S ) = E(T) \Delta E(S)$?
$\Delta$ should denote symmetric difference.
i don't know anything about graph theory but when S is the empty set do you get a problem ?
Suppose that $T=E\setminus S$. Then $E(T\Delta S)=\varnothing$, but any edge within $T$ belongs to $E(T)\Delta E(S)$.
08:12
Well $E(\varnothing) = \varnothing$, so everything works fine.
OK. I should have used different notation.
Let $E(A,B)$ mean "all edges $x y$ where $x \in A$ and $y \in B$"
Does $E(T \Delta S , V \setminus ( T \Delta S ) ) = E(T , V \setminus T) \Delta E(S, V \setminus S)$
We're taking $T,S \subseteq V$.
Are the edges directed in some sense?
No, just simple graphs.
Question came up when I was working on a different problem out of Diestel.
@AndrewSalmon I was working rather hastily, but unless I slipped up, the answer is yes, and you can prove it by element-chasing, showing that each side is a subset of the other.
I had to "reverse" the edge in one case ($T\to S\cap T$).
@BrianM.Scott Hum. This is consistent with my feeling from the start. I'll just have to try proving it.
08:22
@AndrewSalmon A Venn diagram showing $S$ and $T$ is useful.
@AndrewSalmon My pleasure.
the good old "it seems right, and it even works for the empty set" is no rigorous proof is it ? ^^
@Ethan thx gotta think about that...
but not now :-(
@DominicMichaelis Well, I’ve heard of worse heuristics. But I’ve heard of better ones, too!
08:30
I hope, I am able to tell this in english, I sometimes have the feeling, that in higher math there is a lot more heuristical arguments than in the low level stuff
@DominicMichaelis If you mean that there’s more use of heuristics to gain insight, that may well be true. If you mean that heuristics actually replace rigorous argument, it’s not.
2
I mean for sure the final proofs are rigorous, but as the guys are talking about, and with others, there is much less formalism than i expected
@BrianM.Scott: Note that you are over 57%
@robjohn I’ve actually gone up a hair, I think, since the last time I saw the figure.
@BrianM.Scott I thought it was 52% Yesterday, but that might be wrong.
08:35
@DominicMichaelis Yes, because if you really know what you’re talking (or listening!) about, you can get away with more informality.
3
i am completly satisfied with my position math.stackexchange.com/users?tab=newusers
@robjohn This is the one that I like.
@Brian at the moment i have an higher average do i ?
@DominicMichaelis Looks like it, yes.
@BrianM what are your favorite flavors of nonsense ?
08:40
@BrianM.Scott You seem to have capped almost everyday! That is something.
@OrangeHarvester I usually do, nowadays, unless I’m away from home.
@BrianM.Scott cool.
@OrangeHarvester According to this, I’ve lost $52086$ rep to the cap. I can’t say that it distresses me, but I do find it amusing that Arturo and I could ‘fund’ five $20$K users from our combined lost rep!
@BrianM.Scott Hahaha. It seems you both can join forces to create another 100k user!
@OrangeHarvester Yep.
08:44
@BrianM.Scott I'm not that far into the pack, but I can't spend enough days getting ~200 to bring myself over 100.
8
Q: Solutions of $\sin(x)=y$ with $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}$

Dominic MichaelisIs there a way to show that the only solution of $$\sin(x)=y$$ is $x=y=0$ with $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}$. I am seaching a way to proof it with the stuff you learn in linear algebra and analysis 1+2 (the stuff you learn in the first and second term).

could someone help me on this one ?
@robjohn Being retired certainly makes a difference. And you lose some otherwise usable time to moderation.
Btw what is the user "Gone"
@BrianM.Scott It is amazing how much time goes into it.
@DominicMichaelis The user formerly known as Bill Dubuque?
@robjohn What eats up the most time?
08:47
@rob i don't know i am here for 5 days
@BrianM.Scott Dealing with flags, for me at least
@robjohn Who has been seen fairly recently in his Math Gems guise.
@robjohn I so seldom flag anything that I’d be surprised, if I hadn’t seen similar comments from Mariano and others.
@BrianM.Scott There are a constant flow of flags... some legit, some just frivolous.
@robjohn I think that almost all of mine have been for comments masquerading as answers.
ah as a moderator is here
i got a question
what's the difference between a declined and a disputed flag ?
09:00
@DominicMichaelis Some flag types are disputed and some flag types are declined. I don't think the same flag type has the option of being declined if it can be disputed, and vice versa.
mh ok
24 of 25 + for the good answer badge
do you call your professors with their first name or with their last name ?
sry
i just want to know, so i don't flagg things, which shouldn't be flagged
09:21
@DominicMichaelis it will be if it is a complete duplicate, give it some time. Also the part b of the questions is a little different, so it may not be marked as duplicate.
i flagged it
and my flag was declined
09:36
Is this proof sufficient: Let $|G| = 8$ Prove that $G$ has an element of order 2.
Let $a \in G$. It must be true that $a^{|G|} = e$. Assume that $|a| \neq 2$ then, $a^8 \neq 8$.
mh whats about 8=2^3
I dont see your point
we are talking about groups aren'T we ?
since 8 is not prime we have a proper subgroup of order 2
by what theorem?
@Eric Exactly what are you trying to prove?
09:45
@BrianM.Scott It is in the question.
@Eric Which question? I’ve not been following this.
@DominicMichaelis yeah i am trying to think of how lagrange implies this
@eric lagrange
It sounds more like Cauchy's Theorem than Lagrange's though you can use the latter to rule out sizes of subgroups.
Oops; never mind. I must be getting tired.
09:48
For instance, one can use Lagrange's Theorem to show that the order of the cyclic subgroup generated by $a\ne e$ can only be one of $2,4,8$. Thus, either $a^1,a^2,a^4$ has order 2.
@Eric: The easiest argument, I think, is to start with any non-identity element $a\in G$. Then the order of $a$ is $2,4$, or $8$, by Lagrange’s theorem. If it’s $2$, you’re done. If it’s $4$; use $a^2$. And if it’s $8$, use $a^4$.
@Brian Hi, long time!
@BrianM.Scott ok that makes much more sense but how does $a^4$ prove there is an element of order 2? Oh wait, because we can then use the previous idea that if it is 4 then take $a^2$?
@Ethereal No longer a novice, eh? :-)
@BrianM.Scott An ethereal novice!
09:52
@Eric I thought that you were looking for an element of order $2$.
@Ethereal I have to admit, it took me a few minutes to figure out who was behind the new avatar.
@BrianM.Scott yes it is order 2
see my edit
@eric you take a^4
as element
as (a^4)^2 = a^8
@Eric Okay: if $a$ has order $8$, then $a^4$ has order $2$.
ah ok
thank you so much
@BrianM.Scott Which avatar of mine do you remember?
09:54
@Ethereal I remember the cow; I don’t remember what its replacement looked like, but at least I remember the name that went with it.
Now i have to prove that if $|G|=63$ then there is an element of order $3$. I got this :)
@BrianM.Scott You have a better memory than I do.
@Ethereal I truly doubt it. Lately it sometimes reminds me of a Swiss cheese. It was definitely better when I was your age.
@BrianM.Scott Haha!
Wait, is the age shown on the profile?! Oh darn.
Now people know why I always post answers with way too many mistakes.
@Ethereal I didn’t have to check: I remembered how old you were when I first met you here.
09:58
@BrianM.Scott Oh, I don't remember anything about telling you my age. Aging signs already!
@Ethereal You didn’t: I looked at your profile then. :-)
@brian i added that a topologic space is connected if there are only 2 clopen sets
@BrianM.Scott I don't know; I think I did.
singleton is a set with exactly one element or ?
@DominicMichaelis Yes, that’s correct. Babak’s answer is simply wrong.
10:04
i will hear topology next term that's gonna be great :)
@BrianM.Scott What do you tend to do more: explain your work or just write a line's answer? The former is definitely very fancy, but not understandable.
@Ethereal Do you mean here, when writing a paper for publication, or as a student myself?
@BrianM.Scott Here.
@Ethereal It depends. I write some very long answers with lots of explanation, but I also write some very short hints.
@BrianM.Scott How about when you are learning something new?
10:07
@skullpatrol That is why I ask.
@Ethereal: Here is an answer that had to be long.
@skullpatrol You mean writing things out for my own benefit? Then I tend to write more rather than less.
@BrianM.Scott Yes, that is what I meant.
@skullpatrol As an example, I wrote my doctoral dissertation over a Christmas break. I was able to do this because I’d already written up very complete proofs of my results as I discovered them, so it was really just a matter of organizing what I wanted to say and polishing the exposition. (And writing it out longhand $-$ this was $1974$.)
@Ethereal I prefer hers.
10:13
@BrianM.Scott OK, so you prefer explanations.
Me too... most of the time.
@Ethereal I’d say that I prefer whatever I think is most helpful, which most of the time is either a pretty thorough explanation or a very carefully directed hint. But I do like to explain things!
@BrianM.Scott I agree and I also noticed that you like to explain.
But I have no idea why so short answers are sometimes upvoted a lot.
@Ethereal I’ve no doubt that that had a lot to do with my wanting to be a teacher.
They may be pretty, but not helpful.
are the roots are shown correctly ?
at me it's not
10:15
@BrianM.Scott I thought you were one?
@Ethereal Answers that strike people as elegant or usefully general often get a lot of upvotes from people who appreciate the sophistication, even if they’re less useful to the OP.
@BrianM.Scott Take for an example, you-know-who.
@Ethereal Yes, I was; I was just saying that liking to explain things was undoubtedly one of the reasons that I wanted to be one in the first place.
@Ethereal Precisely. But it’s a fairly general phenomenon: I often have an accepted answer with fewer upvotes than one or more of the other answers. Sometimes that’s just because I said something a bit better, but sometimes it’s because I judged the OP’s level better.
But sometimes, when I explain everything, I end up with a zero-votes answer with a short answer accepted. That is a painful feeling when you didn't really need to type a lot: you did it for the sake of others.
@BrianM.Scott Populist!
No wonder why you-know-who got two Populist badges.
Three Great Answers. Wow!
i need 1 vote for a good answer ^^
10:20
@Ethereal And none of them all remarkable; just a case of being in the right place at the right time, so far as I can tell!
@BrianM.Scott I think that each and every answer is a result of being in the right place at the right time. :-)
@Ethereal You do have a point there, yes!
Hi
@Ethereal Did writes some answers that require a bit of work to follow, but that one is a gem.
10:37
do you think i should be a more explicit ? math.stackexchange.com/questions/306976/…
@DominicMichaelis Probably, yes. (And while there’s no harm in mentioning the Banach fixed-point theorem, I doubt that the OP is familiar with it.)
@BrianM.Scott What does the answer mean?
I think that I’d emphasize that there are really two parts to a direct argument, showing that the sequence converges, and then finding the limit, and that it’s the second that’s the easy part.
@Ethereal It’s the graph of a function with the desired properties. Put the ends of the W at $x=1$ and $x=5$, the feet at $x=2$ and $x=4$, and the central peak at $x=3$.
@BrianM.Scott Oh!!!!!!
@Ethereal Cute, isn’t it?
10:43
@BrianM.Scott Took me a while. Haha
i would take the weierstrass function :D
@DominicMichaelis O W! (Pronounce the names of the letters.)
But Didier didn't construct a function... still...
@Ethereal It’s a great hint. I’ve actually used something similar once, I think.
10:47
the newton iteration is global convergent if the function is convex or ?
@BrianM.Scott I never even thought of such a witty answer.
Argh, I desperately want to learn Physics, but I get sleepy when I open the book.
@Ethereal I’ve occasionally thought of clever answers along those lines, but I’ve usually made them as comments.
@BrianM.Scott That is what one should ideally do.
According to you, what is the best answer on the whole site?
@Ethereal No idea at all. Even if I were familiar with and capable of judging all of the answers, I couldn’t pick a single one: there are too many different ways for an answer to be good.
11:50
$u=\frac { z(1+i)-i }{ z+1 } /z\in { C }{ -i }$
what are the set of point for which u is real number
$u=\frac { z(1+i)-i }{ z+1 } /z\in { C }{ -i }$
12:02
@Chris's here ?
12:16
0
Q: Set of points that fulfill a formula

pourjourSuppose $u=\frac{z(1+i)-i}{z+1}$ as $z\in \mathbb{C} \setminus{-i}$ What is the set of points $M(z)$ for which $u$ is a real number? What is the set of points $M(z)$ for which $u$ is pure imaginary number? What is the set of points $M(z)$ for which $|u|=\sqrt{2}$?

@pou you should make it to \mathbb{C} \setminus{-1}
@DominicMichaelis yeah
yep I understand
An expert on "bocses" around?
13:09
Where do I go for the (presumably) FAQ about using GreaseMonkey or some such thing to apply MathJax in the Mathematics chat?
@minopret to have MathJax in chat, you just need to add a book mark with a script in the address field
Is this set closed or not? {z: Im (z) <= 3 Re(z)+1}
the starred message in the top to the right has a link to this
13:37
oh, now I see Etiquette Guidelines | LaTeX support for chat. Good. Thanks.
@Jonas: are you here?
14:07
@Ilya: Hey there! Haven't been here at the same time for a while.
...just missed him...
is there any offline alternative of WolframAlpha
14:25
pencil & paper
@skullpatrol Did he just pop in to look for Jonas? I don't see anything recently said by him.
@robjohn I think so.
@pourjour You mean like Mathematica?
@robjohn so WolframAlpha is just the online version of Mathematica
@pourjour So, that would seem to be an offline alternative to W|A
14:29
@robjohn I like he's ability to parse equation just tape (solve (z^2+z-1=0) and you get the solution
does Mathematica have the same ability
@pourjour You can solve the same equations, but it does not parse english. You need to know the proper syntax
The underlying engine is the same, I believe
@robjohn so it's not that easy
@pourjour I guess. I usually use Mathematica rather than W|A, but I am used to the syntax. Of course, W|A is cheaper than Mathematica...
Off to the park... bbl
@robjohn but W|A is online not offline
15:24
hi guys
heuristics cant replace formal arguments because they can produce contradictions
amen to that. :-)
@robjohn: I searched FAQ and am maybe missing it, but how do you post images on MSE? Do I need some special power?
15:39
@Amzoti No, you just need a certain amount of reputation, 10 to be precise
@Amzoti In chat, you use the upload... button; on main, there is the rectangular image icon (and I think control+G also works).
hi @Chris'ssisterandpals
@user58512 Yes!
@JulianKuelshammer Amzoti has enough rep
15:41
@robjohn: I just deleted Chris's answer.
@robjohn: thanks - can't believe I missed that!
@Chris'ssisterandpals Hi pal.
Where is chris's sister? :P
@Chris'ssisterandpals The title of the question was misleading...
15:43
what is going on??
@Chris'ssisterandpals Hello, sista.
@OrangeHarvester: did you enjoy my last question? :)
@Chris'ssisterandpals It was not asking whether the series converged, but why they got two different answers.
@robjohn: yeah, right.
@robjohn I know
15:43
@Ethereal: hi :-)
Guys, how do I show the steps of an equation? $\Rightarrow$?
@user58512: hello :-)
@Chris'ssisterandpals Boy, I went to the wrong high school!
15:45
@OrangeHarvester: that message was kind of fun. :-) Ishan Banerjee provided with an answer in one line. (that's really nice)
@Chris'ssisterandpals Yes, the question is nice. :-) And solution is cool too.
And I would like to ask again, where do you/your brother/anyone get these questions?
@Ethereal Do you have an example?
@robjohn $x + 3 = 4 \quad \Rightarrow \quad x = 1$
Or would it be $x + 3 = 4 \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad x = 1$
@Ethereal You can do it inline like that for a short sequence of equations, or you can use \begin{align}...\end{align} or simply separate the lines of the sequence by `\\`
@Ethereal That depends on whether the steps are reversible or not
$$
x+3=4\\
\Updownarrow\\
x=1
$$
15:53
@OrangeHarvester: major part of them are created by my brother, and some of them are still unanswered. He has thousands of problems in calculus. As regards this question, I need to ask him. Of course, some problems come from other sources like some local math contests. (see some of my last questions)
@Chris'ssisterandpals Okay. I regularly use your problems as a source of cool problems. I think I might compile a version of them someday. :-)
@OrangeHarvester: glad to hear that. :-)
@Chris'ssisterandpals If I may ask, where do you live?
@OrangeHarvester: sure! I live in Romania.
@robjohn Thanks!
15:59
@Chris'ssisterandpals Ahh, that explains it. :-) In high school, I would look out for math problems from Romanian School Contests on AoPS. They were quite famous.
@OrangeHarvester: Romanian mathematicians are really brilliant. There are plenty of beautiful problems created by them.
you don't have to sharpen a pen
but I like pencils
what about a pen that writes in pencil?
could you invent it.....
Good mathematicians solve problems. Great mathematicians create problems.
In this sense, a mathematician is a backwards engineer.
16:03
I don't agree this quote
@user58512 what about a black pen?
Can anyone check my answer?
@Ethereal No.
@Arkamis isn't that physics? reverse engineer reality
16:04
@Ethereal :P Which answer?
Physicists neither solve nor create problems. They simply re-define reality to suit their desires and/or funding goals.
@Arkamis: I think my brother would love your saying since he creates more and solves less. :D
Now for the point: the question is pretty well-researched and I have posted a very simple proof, but I do not think it's OK because as they say, "If math is too easy, you're doing it wrong."
0
A: Proving that difference of natural numbers is a natural number

EtherealIf $n > m$, then $m + k = n$ where $k$ is a natural number using the closure property under addition. Write $m + k = n$ as $k = n - m$ but we already know that $k$ is a natural number...

"The Standard Model is wrong! Booo to the standard model."
"But I though you need $3 billion dollars to build a machine to find a missing piece in the Standard Model..."
"The standard model is great! Long live the standard model!"
4
@Ethereal the proof has to depend on axiomatic construction of natural numbers based on sets probably.
16:15
Nice talk. I need to leave.
@Ethereal I've posted another solution that is simple and I think is kind of what you were getting at.
@Arkamis I see it.
@Chris'ssisterandpals Later.
16:26
ugh this text puts an e into the equation for absolutely no reasaon
I can not see at all why it is needed
I ran the whole proof without the e and it seems to work
e fixes everything.
Is your work not looking mathematical enough? Throw Euler's Number in there!
Call now and get $i$ for no extra cost.
There needs to be a math text equivalent of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsby_%28novel%29
2
Why does this question have 1k+ views??? math.stackexchange.com/questions/45963/…
I remembered to use the star! I am proud of myself.
that model sounds absolutely useless
16:52
so frusatrating
some really complicated inequality and stuff
17:13
hi
anyone here ?
Nope
can anyone help me understand the answer to this question
0
Q: What does it mean to multiply a matrix by $\bmod{p}$

Ritwik GI am reading a research paper and in one step they have done $S = B \pmod{19}$ where $S$ and $B$ are both matrices. What does it mean? How do I calculate this?

I have mentioned my issue in the comment to that answer
Hi Arkamis, Dominic
mod p means
the rest you have after the division
so 48 mod 2 = 0
and 51 mod 2 = 1
17:16
ok, so its just basic modulus operation
jepp
and a matrix mod p is taking every number of the matrix mod p
@julien here ?
thanks @DominicMichaelis
17:33
@Arkamis why should it not?
@OrangeHarvester Why should who what now?
The gray arrow in people's comments tell you which comments they are replying specifically to.
@Arkamis refer the to the gray arrow at the beginning of the sentence to see which sentence has been replied to.
Enough of your fancy back-linking witchcraft magic!
17:45
@user58512 I don't sharpen my pencils either...
@robjohn you can't sharpen your keyboard
@Arkamis It is an old question and people ask why it has so many views.
@DominicMichaelis My keyboard is sharp enough.
@robjohn And now I have given it more views! This is an unstable feedback loop!
@Arkamis chat fueled view-fest
@Arkamis Its actually cool, if you ask me. Thanks for pointing me to the link. ;-)
17:50
any number theorist here ?
9
Q: Solutions of $\sin(x)=y$ with $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}$

Dominic MichaelisIs there a way to show that the only solution of $$\sin(x)=y$$ is $x=y=0$ with $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}$. I am seaching a way to proof it with the stuff you learn in linear algebra and analysis 1+2 (the stuff you learn in the first and second term).

@DominicMichaelis Please read items 3 and 4 of the chatroom etiquette guidelines
@rob oh i am sry
@DominicMichaelis no worries. I just have seen that banner several times in the last couple of days.
@DominicMichaelis Yes, I'm here. Hello.
@DominicMichaelis what you can try is to see whether anyone in chat has a number theory badge and perhaps ask them.
17:58
@julien i did have a question wait let me search it
@DominicMichaelis Or you can just ask for number theorists and they will answer :-) Oh, I see you paged julien earlier.
what do you mean by $A$ is not necessarily diagonalizable at the upper triangle thread
@DominicMichaelis I simply mean that for instance, $A=\eft( \matrix{1&1\\ 0& 1}\right)$ is not diagonalizable. In the case where there are repeated eigenvalues.
i mean if the diagonal elements are distinct the multiplicity must be equal 1
@DominicMichaelis Yes. If I remember correctly, I said it was true that the matrix is automatically diagonalizable when the diagonal elements are pairwise distinct. But the OP also asked whether there was a clasification in general for upper triangular matrices. And I just said that when there are repeated eigenvalues, both cases can occur: diagonalizable and not diagonalizable.
user19161
18:03
@peoplepower Surely, a great book would be MacLane's Categories for the working mathematician.
Hello
@julien ok than i just misunterstood you
If anyone here is good with gcd() I would appreciate a look at math.stackexchange.com/questions/307244/… -- thank you!
user19161
@robjohn I have a homework badge. So anyone with homework can ask me lol.
@JacobBlack There you go!
user19161
18:13
@julien @dominic I would like to ask if you have seen a copy of Folland's Advanced Calculus before.
@JacobBlack Hi Jacob. No why?
@jacob as i am in the third time and only looked in german calculus books
user19161
@julien Well, I am just curious. It's one of those books by a great author I have never seen before, and I am a fan of math books.
third term*
@orange for sure you know langragian in physics don't you ?
@JacobBlack Ok. I'll look it up.
18:17
@DominicMichaelis Yes.
As i know langrange multiplicators from calculus they have been constants always
as langrage multiplicators for the lagrangian, my prof alwas give an explicit time dependence (?)
user19161
@DominicMichaelis So you know a bit of calculus of variations?
@jacob from theoretical physics a bit yes
user19161
Calculus of variations is one of those topics not really taught much in math courses.
and the notation of theoretical physics sucks, those index fetishists
user19161
18:21
I only know there is something about Euler-Lagrange and Hamilton-Jacobi formulations.
@DominicMichaelis do you mean langrangian multipliers?
@Orange yeah i think so, english is a foreign language :(
user19161
Of course, Evans's PDE has a chapter on COV.
@JacobBlack I have a complete book on it by van Brunt and two or three more books.
Hi people...
18:23
@JacobBlack COV = Change of Variables?
@robjohn calculus of variations
user19161
@OrangeHarvester Joke.
@OrangeHarvester Yeah, I just saw that after I commented :-)
user19161
@robjohn Oh, I overestimated you!
@OrangeHarvester I gave a talk on CoV when I was in undergrad. I was self-taught, so I often don't use the Euler-Lagrange equations.
18:26
@robjohn I see.
@JacobBlack overestimated? in what way?
user19161
@robjohn That you would have read the transcript and then made a joke.
@JacobBlack I might have, but I hadn't seen the original context before.
@DominicMichaelis Okay. Langranigan multipliers are not constant, rather they are variables. And time being the independent variable in physics, the multiplier can have dependence on time.
Anyone willing to take a look?
user19161
18:43
@dev I have posted an answer to your question.
@jacob thanks for correcting, my english is terrible :(
user19161
@DominicMichaelis My Chinese is much worse.
hello
mh what exactly ?
omg i did mess up with rows and colums now i know why they didn't unterstood me :D
@user still want help ?
18:56
sup
sup
i am eating first
gonna have a short break then trying to solve my inequality again

« first day (929 days earlier)      last day (4391 days later) »