« first day (114 days earlier)      last day (1384 days later) » 
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

00:01
xam, you still around?
0
Q: An appoarch to finding the upper bound of $\int_{0}^{\pi}\frac{\sqrt[2]{Re^{i \theta}}}{4+ (Re^{i \theta})^2}iRe^{I \theta}d\theta$

ZophikelI'm having trouble understanding how ML estimates were used to find the upper bound of the Contour Integral defined in $(2.)$. My understanding of the example detailing the integral in question can be followed through from $(1).$ $(0.0)$ If $f$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on the co...

Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt add abstract algebra please xd
@Zophikel I found something of possible interest to you
Xam
Xam
@EricStucky yes
any interest in a CommAlg question?
00:04
room topic changed to This is the Realm of Simply Beautiful Art: Room for totally random people to hang. Open discussions. [abstract-algebra] [big-numbers] [geometry] [logic] [recreational-mathematics]
@SimplyBeautifulArt what is it
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt thank you!
@Simply intial question is done, however there are spacing issues
math.stackexchange.com/questions/2259689/an-appoarch-to-finding-the-upper-bound-‌​of-int-0-pi-frac-sqrt2rei-t
@Zophikel A totally random question related to complex analysis :P
Xam
Xam
@EricStucky ask your question :)
00:04
@Simply sure bring it up
I want to show that the only $k[x]/(x^n)$-modules with finite free resolutions are the free modules.
1 min ago, by Simply Beautiful Art
0
Q: An appoarch to finding the upper bound of $\int_{0}^{\pi}\frac{\sqrt[2]{Re^{i \theta}}}{4+ (Re^{i \theta})^2}iRe^{I \theta}d\theta$

ZophikelI'm having trouble understanding how ML estimates were used to find the upper bound of the Contour Integral defined in $(2.)$. My understanding of the example detailing the integral in question can be followed through from $(1).$ $(0.0)$ If $f$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on the co...

I think this boils down to showing that
@Simply lol
if $f:A\to B$ is an injective map of free R-modules, then $f$ has free cokernel.
Spaceing is a bit off I could not figure out how to fix that
Xam
Xam
@EricStucky but let me tell you that I'm learning commutative algebra xd, I'm not someone very knowledgeable on that topic
obviously not true in general, but true for fields so not completely hopeless for $k[x]/(x^n)$ :P
Fair enough ;)
@Zophikel Did that do it for you?
Xam
Xam
00:09
Mmm well I just don't know what is a free resolution xd. I mean, I have a vague idea of what it is, but I haven't studied properly homological algebra :(
@Simply well it's the spacing of the Contour that the intial big errors and I forgot to place a lot of peroids in any statements I made
@Simply oh and by the way is what I wrote rigours enough ?
Xam
Xam
Anyways, you can ask your question on M.SE. There are some experts on commutative algebra and sure they will answer your question.
:) yik
@Zophikel not entirely sure what you mean by the spacing, it looks fine to me now.
Hi @Xam and @EricStucky let me guess you guys are algebrists
00:11
@Zophikel Looks good as far as I can tell
@Simply I mean centering the image of the Contour within the Remark
technically, I'm a combinatorialist >.<
@Zophikel yup, they be the algebrists
@Simply lol
Xam
Xam
@Zophikel not yet, I'm trying to be one :)
00:12
@Xam I what to become an Analyst
@EricStucky liar, none of your top 5 tags are combinatorics
really?
I want to grow up to be a analytic number theorist!
Xam
Xam
@Zophikel that's nice man
interesting >.<
00:13
@Simply whoa considering your your skills with the complex plane i'd say you have a good chance
Xam
Xam
yeah @Zophikel
o.O I figured for sure you were making a dash for symbolic logic, SBA
@Xam well more specifically speaking I actually what to become a mathematical physicst
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt for sure you'll be a great analytic number theorist :)
00:14
@EricStucky why?
because of the googlology
@Zophikel good goal
^ that
@EricStucky how does that make me a symbolic logician?
@Simply you do act like a number theorist at times
00:15
@Zophikel do I?
Hm...
@Simply yes
Xam
Xam
@Zophikel mathematical physicist? that's amazing.
I'm mostly interested in the functions related to number theory. They behave very strangely.
@Xam specifically speaking I want to be a QIT(Quantum Information Theorist) and Analyst
I figure that googlology is what symbolic logicians do to warm up :P I mean you're already halfway there with the large ordinals.
00:16
@Zophikel That could end up pretty useful.
@EricStucky xD Goodness, what are logicians doing?!
Xam
Xam
@Zophikel wow, that's great.
Can you solve that integral? @Zophikel
@Simply I don't think I can yet :(
@Simply i'm still going through examples of Contour Integration
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt do you know residue theorem?
@Simply it will be a while before I can apply things on my own
00:18
@Xam of course I do. How else would I be doing complex analysis?
SO MANY PINGS! YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE TO PING ME SO MUCH!!!
XD
It's true folks
i'm slowely making progress
@Zophikel yup, okay.
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt are you still in high-school, right?
^.–
00:19
@Xam yup. 17, 11th grade, fun times...
@Simply I hope my question gets answered :(
Learning about inaccessible cardinals and half wanting to get a girl friend, half thinking the latter would be a bad idea and the former idea much better, then thinking that this thinking would probably make me a horrible boyfriend. Fun high school years. amirite?
@Simply finding a girl who likes math is hard these days
Well, it'd be great if a found a lady who did math with me, but I almost feel like that would take away some of the relationship
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt That's amazing. I learned residue theorem when I was in my second year of career at university.
00:22
@Simply a girl who wanted to date for a while wants to be a Theortical Phyiscst
@Xam Well... thanks.
Xam
Xam
And sadly I forgot almost everything that I knew about complex analysis :(
are we talking about girls now? XD
@Xam one thing that I've seen mathmaticans do is they abuse the complex variable methods oftern way too much
@Xam It appears so
Xam
Xam
@Zophikel why do you think that?
00:25
It also appears all the ladies of this room have pretty much left, unless shredalert is just keeping quiet
Xam
Xam
anyways I'm not a mathematician xd
@Xam Real analysis can sometimes be more magical
Xam
Xam
neither I pretend to be one u.u
Zophikel's point is sometimes complex analysis is overkill
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt sure, I can tell you that when I studied real analysis I really liked the topic, but then I studied abstract algebra and everything changed xd
00:26
IMO they should only be used when necessary
It's like how I find beauty in using the squeeze theorem for horribly hard limits:
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2259517/evaluate-riemann-sum/2259586#2259586
Xam
Xam
Oh, I got it
Preferably, use your tools as needed. Sledge hammers are not for nails.
@Simply I can't think of it on the top of my head but there was well known mathmatians who would abuse Transform Theory
Though don't force the nail through with too weak a tool like I do with the squeeze theorem and almost all my Riemann sum answers xD
00:28
lol
@Zophikel Say, do you know Feymann?
@Simply yeah he was more of a phyiscst
@Simply I learned his integration trick :-)
Xam
Xam
But you are free to use sledgehammers whenever you can. I don't see anything really bad about it
@Zophikel Differentiation under the integral?
@Simply yup
Xam
Xam
00:29
His integration tricks is very nice
@Xam There is a certain satisfaction to see a problem done in the most elementary fashion possible
Speaking of abusing complex analysis: mathoverflow.net/questions/42512/…
Xam
Xam
I remember there was a Putnam problem where you can use his trick
(obviously this is not what you meant, but it's still one of my faves)
@Zophikel Any others you know of? ;P
@Xam Did it have ln(x) in the numerator?
Xam
Xam
00:30
@SimplyBeautifulArt yes I think. I don't remember exactly xd
@Simply there are other integral tricks I can't rember them of the top of my head
Xam
Xam
@SimplyBeautifulArt that's right, but that doesn't mean that you can't use sledgehammers ;)
But when get to do research sometimes overkill is the only way to go
@Zophikel you have a comment on the main site.
@Zophikel not particularly from Feymann, just real techniques in general
Frullani's integral, integral transforms, series expansion, Glasser's Master theorem, etc.
^ Real stuff
:)
@EricStucky xD
Xam
Xam
Talking about sledgehammers: math.stackexchange.com/a/384849/133781
00:34
              ^ Whole bunch of the here
@Simply you have a book on integral tricks
@Zophikel No, I come across them from MSE
and then I make lots of notes
@Simply ahh I've got to start making notes on what I see on MSE
yeah, very useful
Xam
Xam
M.SE has a lot valuable information
@Zophikel especially reading the highest voted questions from, say, complex analysis tag
00:36
@Simply all right I'll have to do that sometime
also noticed your hint thanks, I did have an alternate appoarch to it
through
Xam
Xam
In general, you can learn a lot from high voted questions and answers in any tag you want.
I was thinking of just generalizing the triangle inequality and going from there
Xam
Xam
Another sledgehammer: mathoverflow.net/a/42514/97665 from the same link that was given by @EricStucky
@Zophikel If you do figure it out, you should post your own answer :)
Xam
Xam
FLT for n=3 solved by using Nagell-Lutz theorem xd
00:41
@Simply I have but i'll have to do it tomorrow for $(5.1)$. $(5.2)$ I not sure how to justify the intial step
@Simply why didn't you upvote my question
@Zophikel It's just multiplying the result from 5.1 by pi*R
@Zophikel I didn't? xD Sorry, triple tasking or something like that right now, hard to keep track of stuff
@Simply it's all right
@Xam there was one that said "there are infinitely many primes because $\zeta(3)$ is irrational"
@Simply oh all right but why did they multiply by $\pi*R$
@Zophikel the integral part from the very very top, right above $(0.)$
the integral = arc length = ½*circumference = pi*R
Xam
Xam
00:44
@Zophikel hehe mai gad
@Simply ahhh that's what I missed
@Simply i'll have to get on this tomorrow
Xam
Xam
well, I let you guys to discuss some complex analysis. See you later and have a good day (:
okay
oh, well, good bye everyone
00:46
see ya guys
@Simply so the integral vanishes because our contour is covering $\mathbb{C}$
No, its because the function tends to zero fast enough as |z|→∞
that's how I look at it
@Simply ahh all right so as it's approaching 0 as |z| -> $\infty$ the integral vanishes
so it would be safe to say the integral converges to zero
Further, it converges to 0 faster than the arc-length tends to infinity
The ML-estimate you speak of is this.
@Simply all right now I understand
 
3 hours later…
03:38
@SimplyBeautifulArt hi
 
7 hours later…
10:29
@TheGreatDuck hi
 
3 hours later…
13:00
 
3 hours later…
15:46
Lol, love the feeds
15:56
Note to self: when I finally get around to creating my office, include the XKCD feed
16:27
And that is why we have so little comics...
16:48
Woo, one AP exam down
one AP project down
4 more exams to go
Woot woot
@TheGreatDuck xD don't judge us!
Hey @EricStucky
@SimplyBeautifulArt :D
:P
0
Q: a definite log-sin integral

Solomonoff's SecretI am wondering if there is a way to solve this definite integral depicted below: $$\int_0^1 \log(-\log(x)\sin(x))\text{d}x.$$ Mathematica numerically evaluates this integral to $-1.63394$. I am not experienced with these types of integrals and have tried approaches in related questions with n...

4
Q: If $A = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}+\cdots+\frac{1}{\sqrt{999}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1000}}.$ Then $\lfloor A \rfloor$ is,

juantheron If $\displaystyle A = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}+\cdots\cdots\cdots+\frac{1}{\sqrt{999}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1000}}.$ Then $\lfloor A \rfloor$ is, where $\lfloor A\rfloor = A-\{A\}.$ $\bf{My\; Try::}$ Using $$\left(\sqrt{k}+\sqrt{k-1}\right)<2\sqrt{k}<\left(\sqrt{k+1}+\sqrt{k}\ri...

If these are not answered later, then I shall answer them :) Or attempt
17:12
@TheGreatDuck: Bad news: you can only apply Darboux's theorem when the function is differentiable on the interval. So I accidentally assumed the conclusion, derp.
17:40
Hey @Astyx
Hya
What brings you around these parts?
Curiosity mainly
How are you ?
53 mins ago, by Simply Beautiful Art
Woot woot
Okay
Same
What goes on in this chatroom ?
Haha :p
It's already been 115 days ... Damn time flies
I also heard you had a Discord channel
17:47
Yup
Check my profile
Will do
@Astyx what are your areas of mathematics?
(Wowee....pretty busy chat room over the post two hours....lots a traffic too! Good to see, and hello to all!)
School ?
Just kidding, I am not specialized yet, I know some analysis, number theory, topology, etc but nothing too deep
Hi @amWhy
17:55
Hello! No need to specialize just yet...explore, sample, and pay attention how excited/interested you get when sampling....
Well, this place is open for whatever you got. Can't guarantee we're as good as Ted at answering your thoughts, but we can certainly try :-)
Hello, Dear Simply Beautiful Math!
All I get is a Lol? :(
Right cool :)
17:59
@amWhy good day then :D
@SimplyBeautifulArt Done with exams; on to ordinal collapsing functions! How did your exams go?
Hey @InfiniteMonkey
@SimplyBeautifulArt Yayyyy I'll try!
Exams still going going going....
May the Math Force be with you for those ;)
(Pun intended since we are May first)...
18:00
Lol, don't think I'll need thamt, but thanks
@SimplyBeautifulArt New word, I see; "thamt; care to define? :P
Thamt = T*ham*t = t^2*ham
Time squared times ham
Nice impromptu answer!
Ham on Time Square?!
Indeed
Actually T is period in physics, right?
18:17
Yes if you refer to periodic motion uppercase "T" is indeed the period and lowercase "t" is time but uppercase "T" may be temperature if you are talking about thermodynamics.
Physics often runs out of letters, even Greek ones!
So you may have cooked your "ham" up to temperature "T" in time "t"...
But what if temperature also is periodic in time? then we're screwed with our T's...
 
2 hours later…
20:03
Hello @everyone!
@InfiniteMonkey Agh! Don't leave! :D
@Simply And what are your areas of maths ?
Analysis-y stuff and large numbers for the moment
My large finite numbers and I
What level are you at ?
What do you mean?
Like, are you a grad student, undergrad etc ?
20:14
I'm a high schooler
Oh nice
Yuppie doodles
@Astyx are you a grad student
No, I'm two years after highschool (not sure what to call that in English, I'm not really at the university)
oh your a junior @Astyx
20:21
Surely, not sure what that means :p
You ?
@Astyx i'm a third year
Right
I'm a -1 year
0 year = right before college
:P
@Simply lol also have a question about the Residue THeorm
sure mate
@Mithrandir Say, do you happen to know if I can get pings when new users enter this room or something like that?
20:25
in $(5.2)$ does the result follow from the Reisude Theorm
3
Q: An approach to finding the upper bound of $\int_{0}^{\pi}\frac{\sqrt[2]{Re^{i \theta}}}{4+ (Re^{i \theta})^2}iRe^{I \theta}d\theta$

ZophikelI'm having trouble understanding how ML estimates were used to find the upper bound of the Contour Integral defined in $(2.)$. My understanding of the example detailing the integral in question can be followed through from $(1).$ $(0.0)$ If $f$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on the co...

Pretty sure its just the ML-estimate
@SimplyBeautifulArt off the top of my head, no, I don't think it's possible.
@Mithrandir okay, thnx
@Zophikel
@Simply oh shoot sorry wrong thing
@Simply looking further into the example they repeat the same on $\gamma_{2}$
My intial question @Simply with some integrals to you have to go around the full contour
Hm, no, you can split it into parts
20:36
@Simply how so ?
well, the same way the integral was split over $\gamma_r$ and other parts in your question
Integrals can always be split into parts.
@Simply ahh all right
:P
All old calculus stuff stays
@Simply i'm making progress but Contour Integration is hard lots of machinery involed
yeah :(
FYI, I ask wolframalpha for residues because those things are algebra intensive.
20:51
@Simply I thought you worked out everything by hand
nah, that stuff gets messy
I just know how to do it
I mean I could, and I do do it by hand if it isn't too bad...
but sometimes those rational functions with exponentials inside trig functions are too much.
@Mithrandir does it mean anything when I try to grant a user access to my realm and their username does not appear in the little search box?
@SimplyBeautifulArt screenshot?
What's the user who you want to add?
I'm blind
no problem lol
They've never visited chat, that's all.
They have 20 reputation, so if you give them the link they should be able to chat.
21:13
ah
okay, just wondering
@Mithrandir that's what I usually do when I can't just invite them :-/
14
Q: Is simple mathematics for learners allowed here?

user12345Are users encouraged to ask simple math questions in this forum as well? Most of the questions here seem advanced for a math learner.

I see @amWhy has visited that meta post
:D Does it do nothing for you?
Correct
@Simply is there a site where you could look up Contour's for integrals of various forms
21:21
@Zophikel I personally just ask @Zaid, but he's not here at the moment. If we ever need him I'll call him over.
@Simply I think when I get the crux of the machinery behind contour integration I think drawing out the Contour will be the most hardest part
Always
2
A: If $A = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}+\cdots+\frac{1}{\sqrt{999}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1000}}.$ Then $\lfloor A \rfloor$ is,

Simply Beautiful ArtNotice that: $$60.41<60.5<61.24$$ but, $$\lfloor60.5\rfloor=60\ne61$$ so your logic is wrong. To correct it, simply note that: $$\sum_{k=2}^{1000}\frac1{\sqrt k}=\sum_{a=2}^{10}\frac1{\sqrt a}+\sum_{b=11}^{1000}\frac1{\sqrt b}$$ Likewise, you will find that $$\sum_{a=2}^{10}\frac1{\sqrt a...

@amWhy duplicate question
@Simply worked through my first example on Contour Integration :D
fully understand it :-D
@Zophikel or so you think.... MWAHAHAHA
@Zophikel Also, that's a smart integral guy
@Simply i'll only know with pratice
@Simply does MSE have an integral community lol
21:34
no, not really
@Simply can you get multiple results from doing Contour Integration
sure
consider anything involving branches
the result depends on which branch cut you use
Just in cases like $\sqrt x$, we choose it to be positive when $x$ is a positive real
'normal' branch choice
@Simply in the example i'm using looks like I haven't worked thorugh all of it last part uses the Residue Theorm to calculate singularities inside $\gamma_{r}$
@Simply what is the Reisdue Theorm and why is it so elegent
21:43
It's like the fundamental theorem of calculus
So here's the difference between differentiation and integration and why integrals are so much harder
differentiation: you need information about stuff around one point.
integration: you need information about all of the stuff within an interval
clearly one requires more to do, hence it will be harder
@Simply Integration is harder then differnetaiton
the fundamental theorem of calculus then allows you to reduce integrals down to two points if you know enough about the function you are integrating.
Likewise, the residue theorem let's you reduce complex integrals down to discrete points rather than having to Riemann sum along the entire bloody path.
@Simply ahh ok
@Simply are you made at me
that's the answer to the elegance
@Simply ahh ok sorry
21:47
no, of course not. My physics teacher says 'bloody' sometimes when things are just horribly unnecessarily complicated, so I thought I'd try it out
I mean, who does complex integrals with Riemann sums? God save whoever those people are.
@Simply good point
Btw, did you know you can have residues at infinity?
@Simply yeah
and sometimes you have infinitely many residues inside the contour?
@Simply I did not know that
21:50
It just turns it into a series problem
@Simply interesting I have a lot more practice to do if I want to master the complex plane
@Simply do you think i'm making good progress
yup
Say, what integral did you do earlier?
@Zophikel
@SimplyBeautifulArt the one I linked earlier
21:58
ah, okay
Want to see a cool contour integral? I may have shown you it already.
$$\int_0^{2\pi} e^{\cos(\theta)} \cos(\theta-\sin(\theta))\ d\theta$$
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

« first day (114 days earlier)      last day (1384 days later) »