« first day (2372 days earlier)      last day (2944 days later) » 

12:13
@Secret I still have no clue what your proof is.
What is $A$, and how are you using subsets of $\mathbb{Z}^+$ as indices for the $A_i$ and $B_i$ ?
The idea behind your proof is fine, really.
$A$ is a subset such that $A$ and its complement will divide $\mathbb{Z}^+$ into two partitions (using your hint). $M$ is any subset of $\mathscr{P}(\mathbb{Z}^+)$ which can be the whole set, some set that span across the two partitions, or a subset of only one partition.

In all cases, $M=A_i \cup B_i$ where $A_i$ and $B_i$ are subsets of the partitions $A$ and $A^c$ respectively to give the required $M$ ( I think I can do away with the index $i$ completely (which runs from $0$ to $|\mathscr{P}(\mathbb{Z}^+)|$ anyway, by instead calling $C=A_i$ and $D=B_i$ so that $C$ and $D$ will depend o
So you're using an uncountable index set...
> else if some element is not in $M$ or not in $A$
Also, you're not trying to identify a subset of $P(\mathbb{Z}^+)$ with a binary sequence.
Actually there might be a problem here, there are TWO conditions being mapped to the label 0 in the binary sequence, I think I will end up some infinite subsets being labelled with the same sequence...
12:24
You're trying to identify an element of it with a binary sequence.
Aren't all elements of a power set subsets itself instead of elements?
An element of $P(A)$ is a subset of $A$.
Not a subset of $P(A)$.
how should we handle elements of $P(A)$ such that part of it is a subset of $A$ and part of it is a subset of $A^c$?

e.g. suppose $A$ contains the even numbers, then the subset {1,2,4,6,8,...} is not entirely a subset of $A$?
Uhhh... you can't?
A subset of $A$ can never intersect with $A^c$
what is c?
12:34
Set complement
Of course, if you want to speak of a complement, you should define the universe first.
with respect to what?
@Secret no element of P(A) can be "partly subset of A and partly subset of A^c"
{1,2,4,6,8,...} is not an element of the power set of {2,4,6,8,...}
@Secret in ZF everything is an element and everything is a set
Now that's just confusing in this context.
what are you guys trying to do?
Either way, @Secret, just start at the basics. We want a bijection
$$h: P(\mathbb{Z}^+) \to \{0,1\}^{\mathbb{Z}^+} $$
12:39
Yup
The codomain is the set of maps $f: \mathbb{Z}^+ \to \{0,1\}$
yup we have showed that in Q5
@SteamyRoot isn't that trivial?
we are going step by step, else I fear I will confuse
And my hint was: for any $A \subseteq \mathbb{Z}^+$ (or in other words, $A \in P(\mathbb{Z}^+)$ ), and any $x \in \mathbb{Z}^+$; either $x \in A$ or $x \notin A$.
@DHMO what is?
The question?
12:41
@SteamyRoot bijection between P(Z+) and 2^Z+
It's not entirely trivial.
hmm...
Ok so $A$ partitions $(P(\mathbb{Z}^+) or \mathbb{Z}^+)$ into two...?
What do you think yourself?
is there a closed form for recurrences like $a_{n+1}=\frac{a_n+g(n)}{1-a_ng(n)}$ where $g$ is a rational function?
12:46
@Secret it may be easier to do this: biject between P(4) and 2^4
this question math.stackexchange.com/questions/2122133/… is about $a_0=\frac{-3}{16}$ and $g(x-1)=\frac{x^4+6x^3+10x^2-x-9}{(x+1)(x+2)(x+3)(x^3+7x^2+15x+8)}$
@Secret where of course 2 is {0,1} and 4 is {0,1,2,3}
So in {0,1,2,3} for any subset, there are 4 choices for each entry. We label the ith element that show up with 1, otherwise 0
wunderbar
Ok so generalising back to the original question, then given any subset $A \in P(\mathbb{Z}^+)$, elements $x$ either show up in $A$ or not show up in $A$ (thus showing up in $\mathbb{Z}^+-A$ instead), thus 0 and 1 can be used to signal similarly
12:58
Indeed.
So $h$ maps $A \subset \mathbb{Z}^+$ to $$f: \mathbb{Z}^+ \to \{0,1\}: x \mapsto \left\{\begin{array}{cl} 0 & \text{ if ...}\\ 1 & \text{ if ...}\end{array} \right.$$
?
For all $A$, map

0 if $x\not\in A$

1 if $x \in A$
Exactly! :)
Such a function $f$ is called an indicator function of the set $A$. They're very useful functions (and important in measure theory!)
Note that you can describe $h^{-1}$ in very simple terms, by the way.
$$h: \{0,1\}^{\mathbb{Z}^+} \to P(\mathbb{Z}^+): f \mapsto f^{-1}(\{1\})$$
It means any binary sequence get mapped to some subset that has some elements in it corresponding to the entries 1?
and the zero sequence (which is not in $f^{-1}(\{1\}))$ is taken account of by mapping it to the emptyset, I guess...
13:10
Well, the zero sequence is the zero map, so $f^{-1}(\{1\})$ is empty.
@SteamyRoot how exactly do we call this field of study that we are doing?
Uhhh...
Set theory? I dunno.
I think I must be tripping
One of the courses I teach, which is "Mathematical reasoning and proving", has this kind of stuff.
13:14
How is $1-y^{2}+y^{4}-y^{8}+y^{16}-\cdots$ NOT a geometric series?
Now I am wondering about the case $P(\mathbb{Z}^+)\to \{0,...,n\}$ :
If $n$ is of the form $2^m$ for $m \in \mathbb{Z}^+$ (The case when $n=\aleph_0$ is trivial because you end up having the same set, which is obviously in bijection correspondance), then we can achieve the required parition by partitioning the entries in the sequence into m-1 blocks (because the last two case is taken cared by $x\in A$ and $x \not\in A$. But what if $n$ is odd, how should I partition $A$ so that $h^{-1}$ can map nicely?
Anybody?
I'm supposed to TA this. My supervising prof says it's not a geometric series, I say it is. Who's right?
@JessyunBourne what is the common ratio?
@Secret I don't understand what the first line means
Oops I made a typo. I mean:

Show that there's a bijection $f: P(\mathbb{Z}^+)\to \{0,...,n\}^{\mathbb{Z}^+}$ for all countable $n$
I have sketched how to prove for the even cases, I am currently working on the odd case
Ok I figured:
@JessyunBourne it is a geometric series $\sum_n (-1)^n y^{2n}$
13:24
@DHMO it's not obvious? It's $-y^2$
@Secret Maybe find a bijection with $(\Bbb Z^+)^{\Bbb Z^+}$ and mimic the proof of Cantor–Schroeder–Bernstein?
@Sophie that's what I said! Stupid prof doesn't agree with me. Of course, he's also under the impression that the common ratio in $4-x^2+\frac{x^4}{4}-\frac{x^8}{16}$ is $-\frac{x^2}{2}$
@AkivaWeinberger That's part of Q7 which is something I am still working on
@JessyunBourne Look at it carefully
@AkivaWeinberger what are you saying?
13:27
What's $(-y^8)/y^4$? What's $y^{16}/(-y^8)$? @JessyunBourne
For all $n$ countable and for any, we can employ the following partition. Group the entries of the sequence as follows:

$\mathbb{Z}/(n-1)\mathbb{Z}$

Therefore for the ith entry, if $x \in k\mathbb{Z}$ for some $k \in \mathbb{Z}^+$ mark the entry accordingly with the numel correspond to the equivalence class of $\mathbb{Z}_{n}$ (omitting the zero class). If $x \not\in A$ then label that zero.
$-y^{2}$ @AkivaWeinberger
No @JessyunBourne
Remember, $y^m/y^n=y^{m-n}$
So $y^8/y^4={}?$
13:29
Ugh.
The real geometric series would be $1-y^2+y^4-y^{\color{Red }6}+y^{\color{Red} 8}-\dotsb$.
Yeah...I'm doing real great today.
typo: and for any subset $A$
Thanks @AkivaWeinberger
hey @arctictern
13:30
hey
I was wondering have you heard of tensor triangulated geometry before ?
@JessyunBourne Here you also want that last exponent to be $6$
(Click on the arrow)
@Adeek no
some prof gave a talk about it was interesting
@Adeek Who was that? I have heard a bit about it
13:34
Balmer
his name is Paul Balmer @TobiasKildetoft
my professor was suggesting this topic for research
Yeah, I seem to recall that name being mentioned as one of the people getting the original ideas for that stuff
seems very interesting
About some geometry underlying certain aspects of tensor triangulated categpries
yeah
My professor was explanining it to me I was fascinated
@Secret hint: binary to ternary
13:37
One of my collaborators has done some work in that area and gave a talk about it some time ago
@TobiasKildetoft do you happen to have
the pdf for the talk ?
I am interested to see it if you have it
@Adeek It was not done with slides, but it was based on the paper arxiv.org/abs/1402.3732
thanks :)
yeah this stuff seems interesting and also has it seems to spread into many fields which is interesting
Uh, is the following proof legal?

Given $D={\mathbb{Z}^+}^{\mathbb{Z}^+}$ and $E=\{0,1\}^{\mathbb{Z}^+}$, we can deduce by inspection that $E \subset D$ since $D$ contains all sequences with countable entries including binary sequences, thus a injective $g: E\to D$ can be defined as the (not surjective) fixed point function. $f(x)=x$ for all $x \in E$

Now it remains to get an injective $h: D \to E$ to invoke the theorem in Q6a to show $|D|=|E|$
Take any subset $A \subset D$, partition $A$ into countable parts. For all $x \in D$, define
I am terribly not comfortable with bijections between uncountable sets
There's only one countable type of infinite cardinal, but there are countably many uncountablely infinite cardinals
typo: 1 if $x \in A$
@Secret many many more, the cardinals are a proper class
13:52
O wait, I don't need to partition $A$ into countable parts, just $h$ being an indicator is sufficient
@Secret the entries of a sequence in D are whole numbers. a number is not "countable," sets of whole numbers are countable. so one does not call the entries countable.
also I don't see where you defined $g$, and no idea what $f$ is supposed to be for
sorry f is a typo, should be g
so $g$ is the identity function, not the "fixed point function"
but aren't identity functions must be bijective?
g is not surjective, all nonbinary sequences are left untouched
you're being silly for no reason.
g(x)=x is an identity function. if you want to be a purist and restrict the term "identity" to only functions with the same domain and codomain then you end up with nothing to call $g$. certainly not "fixed point function."
13:57
Ok, I did not aware of that distinction in convention
it is the restriction of the identity function on D to E
@Secret you write $h:D\to E$, but according to your definition $h$ takes an element $x\in D$ and spits out an element in $\{0,1\}$, not an element of $E$
@Secret "there are countably many uncountably infinite cardinals" Um, what?
@AlessandroCodenotti buongiorno
For that what I am trying to say is given a sequence $(x_0,x_1,x_2,...)$ while $x_i$ is just one number for each sequence, there are a maximum of |D| number of choices for $x_i$. and the sequence itself is countably long. Perhaps I am trying to say the number of choices of each entry is countable, not the entry itself i countable (something I am not very sure how to handle)

$h$ acts on $A$ and start labelling the binary sequence based on whether the ith element is present or absent in the sequence. Maybe the domain of h should be the set of all $A$ instead
@arctictern uh, I have no idea... I have been trying to avoid using $\aleph$ numbers when doing munkres exercise given how I have so much misconception of them...
@arctictern is this right? map (1,3,5,7,9,...) to (010001000001000000010000000001...)
@DHMO that is a nice injection
don't really need the extra 0 pad in front of each block
14:08
@arctictern oh, I thought it is N not Z+
if it were N then the 0 padding wouldn't help. you'd have to just add (1,1,1...) to the inputs and then do your thing
So given h, and some subset A I end up with a sequence for example {28,1,3,...}=(00...10... 100... 0030... ...)
@AlessandroCodenotti did you see (visti?) my question?
(I don't know how to handle ... if I go to higher cardinal set proofs however)
14:11
hi chat
@arctictern I don't understand. (0,0,...) should map to (1111...)
because if the codomain is a set of a higher cardinal, then it is impossible for a set with lower cardonality to fill in all ...
and anything from countable onwards, when trying to write down, will look like ...
@DHMO ah nevermind then.
Conclusion: I have no idea how to handle uncountable sets and that is why I stuck in Q7
was combining binary with your thing in my head for a second
14:12
@Secret how can you deal with uncountable sets if you can't deal with the empty set?
@Secret is Munkres an online book?
@DHMO Munkres is a standard text on topology. Ch.1 contains all the basics to get start on topology. I need topology to understand some QFT and GR stuffs (as well real analysis)
is it online?
It is, there's a pdf on the first link in google
ok
Munkres is good, before that I don't know how to handle functions abstractly
now at least I know some
@arctictern Ok I think my confusion about uncountable sets is as follows:

Consider a sequence (A,B,C,D,...) from some set $F$ where A=(000...) B=(0100..) C=(1011..) D=(1001...) etc. . I want to check whether it bijects with G thus the first step is to seek for a injective function. How can I know whether I have fill in each ... (especially if F has size larger than or equal the reals and G and F may be of unequal size)?
14:21
You want to check whether what bijects with G?
(and what's G?)
@DHMO which one
@s.harp Thank you I think I understand now. So, before Abu Jafar there were no systematic way to add numbers together. I would like to know if there were no such system, then are we going to discover the same as Abu Jafar have discovered..
both G and F are uncountable sets that might be larger than the reals, say $F=2^\mathbb{R}$ and $G=\mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{R}}$. I want to check whether G and F bijects each other, then I ran into problem when I tried to write a sequence of it to figure how to partition it and define my bijective function (if any). Because attempt to writing down the sequence we will get (where x is some number from the domain)

(xxx... xxx... xxx... x...)

But those ... may not be countable and I don't know their uncountable size until I can find a bijective function, but these ... is what cause me to struggle
That's when you start using cardinal arithmetic
@YOUSEFY there were systematic ways, this is just a specific way of doing it with a decimal representation (which is modern terminology) that allows you to do it very fast on a piece of paper
14:27
@AlessandroCodenotti Do cardinal arithmetic came after proving bijections for variosu pairs of sets or is done separately from the construction of infintie cardinals?
that is, are they justified without proving the corresponding bijections?
It's a consequence of the definitions (of cardinals and operations between them)
I see, so as long my two target sets I want to seek for bijection is not larger than $\mathbb{Z}^\mathbb{Z}$ then I can still list out the sequence treating the possible values of the ith entry as a countable block and then the whole sequence countable, but any set larger than that we use cardinal arithmetic?
Hi @Alessandro
Not necessarily, you can prove explicitely that $|\mathcal{P}(\Bbb N)|=|\Bbb R|$ for example
Hi @Balarka
How's physics
14:36
groans
Not too bad actually, we did a couple past exams today and they were kind of fine
I really like the Lagrangian formulation because it's a very mathematical approach to classical mechanics, but then we get those exercises with 2 spring and a magnetic field on a rotating plane and that's just a lot of calculations
I really should be doing chemistry but I'm procrastinating by listening to music
14:38
Which kind of music?
@AlessandroCodenotti :
11 hours ago, by DHMO
@AlessandroCodenotti I don't understand how the empty set can be constructed from the ZF. They claim that I can do it from Axiom of Infinity and Axiom of Subsets, but I feel that it would be circular, since Axiom of Infinity uses the empty set.
Ya, the problems in physics are really about stuff happening in all kinds of unlikely phenomenon.
@DHMO There is an axiom that a set exists
@TobiasKildetoft which?
It is usually assumed and not stated explicitely
14:40
@DHMO Usually labelled $0$ (I can never recall what most of the names of them cover)
@AlessandroCodenotti In this site it is said, "Itô includes an Axiom of the empty set, which can be gotten from (6) and (3)"
@AlessandroCodenotti rock n' roll stuff.
@TobiasKildetoft I cannot find the axiom that claims the existence of a set in the site linked above
@DHMO Well, given the axiom of infinity it is not needed.
Or rather, Bowie's things. Not all of them can actually be classified as rock n' roll I guess. I find his avant garde stuff a lot more interesting.
14:41
since that also states the existence of a set
@TobiasKildetoft problem is, axiom of infinity used the concept of empty set
@DHMO Does it?
@TobiasKildetoft what is the axiom of infinity?
It just states that a certain type of set exists
I noticed yesterday that Hatcher has some very interesting looking notes on algebraic topology @Balarka. Why is there so much interesting math to learn?
14:43
Notes? He has a book on algebraic topology.
@TobiasKildetoft But the site linked says that the axiom of infinity basically defines $\Bbb N$
He does have notes on topology.
@DHMO Axioms do not define anything. Axiom of infinity states that a set exists with some properties which mean that it "is" the natural numbers
Right, the one on algebraic topology is a whole book
@BalarkaSen general topology?
Mhm
I am a big fan of his alg. top. book
14:46
@TobiasKildetoft But in the source I have, the axiom of infinity reads $\exists S \left[ \varnothing \in S \land \left( \forall x \in S \right) \left[x \cup \{x\} \in S \right] \right]$
I have a hard copy with me
@DHMO Right, that does not use the existence of an empty set (and even says it exists explicitly, since any element of a set is a set)
but we haven't defined the empty set
@DHMO Then the axiom makes no sense, rather than being cyclical
@TobiasKildetoft so how to deal with it?
14:48
@DHMO define the empty set
@TobiasKildetoft how?
in the usual way, as a set $\emptyset$ such that $a\in\emptyset$ is never true.
@TobiasKildetoft how do you know that there is such a set?
@DHMO I don't, until I have an axiom stating this. That is no obstacle to defining it
@TobiasKildetoft and which axiom states this?
14:51
In your case, infinity
exactly
(together with elements of sets being sets)
@BalarkaSen can it be used as a first text or does it assume some alg. top. background? I skimmed the first part and it looked like the former
@TobiasKildetoft and why is there no problem?
Summary of my confusions when doing bijection proofs
14:54
@DHMO Why would there be one?
@TobiasKildetoft because the empty set is defined by the axiom of infinity, and the axiom of infinity uses the empty set
@DHMO No, the empty set is defined as I said. The existence is guaranteed by the axiom of infinity
@Secret what do you mean by "codomain set"
definitions and existence are completely unrelated
14:56
@TobiasKildetoft I still can't get this through my head...
@DHMO the set that contains the image of the functions
oh
@Secret how is the second line countable?
$2^{\Bbb N}$ is not even countable
o wait mistake...
nvm, consider we have a countable number of blocks consists of 2 entries, then the number of these blocks (which holds the possible values that each entry can take in the image sequence) are countable
But that's what I am not sure about. Can we really write down a sequence of length $\aleph_1$ this way without running into problems
@Secret this sentence makes no sense to me
Each x you saw can take either the values 0 or 1. There are countable number of such x
15:01
why are there countable number of such x?
@AlessandroCodenotti It's a first text.
I got into it after reading stuff from the IInd part in Munkres' topology book though. But I was mathematically less mature then.
wait sorry, let me check again...
ok sorry, this is the correct version
and the third line?
domain and image are both $\mathbb{N}$ for that
I see
15:06
So for the case in the picture, the domain is countable, thus the sequence is a tuple of countable length. Each entry can then take 0 or 1, thus all possible sequences is like having a countable nunber of {0,1} blocks
And for $\mathbb{N}\to \mathbb{N}$, there are countable number of entries in each sequence, and countable number of choice for each entry.
In both case they are both uncountable
But then the question is, can I really treat the entire enumeration of them as if they are $2\times \mathbb{N}$ and $\mathbb{N}\times \mathbb{N}$ matrices?
that is, is a countable number of countable blocks make any rigorous sense?
I see, I'll think about it after G-P maybe
@BalarkaSen Here's an alg-geom type question for you. Is the plane curve $xyz=0$ singular?
@Semiclassical I don't get it. That's not a plane curve in C^3... it's the three axes intersecting at (0, 0, 0).
@Secret I don't understand why $\Bbb N \to \Bbb N$ consists of countable blocks
I mean that to be in P^2, sorry.
In which case I think it should just have double points at [0,0,1], [0,1,0], [1,0,0].
15:10
I see. Yes, that's what it is.
What's weirding me out is how those singularities seem to behave under perturbation.
Though I admittedly have a specific kind of perturbation in mind.
@Alessandro If you go through GP you'll get a lot of motivation for a lot of stuff in AT
if the domain is $\{0,..,n\}$ then f({0,...,n})={f(0),...,f(n)}

So if the domain is $\mathbb{N}=\{0,...\}$, then f({0,...})={f(0),...}
Namely, changing to $F=xyz-a xy^2-b yz^2-czx^2$ for parameters $a,b,c$.
@Secret what would the identity function look like?
15:12
Though maybe I shouldn't be surprised if perturbing by singular terms gives me different behavior than I expect.
@DHMO f({0,...})={f(0),...}={0,...}
@Secret can you give more terms?
@Semiclassical Hm, maybe try to understand what happens on each affine chart.
@DHMO f({0,1,2,3,4,5,6,...})={f(0),f(1),f(2),f(3),f(4),f(5),f(6),...}={0,1,2,3,4,5,6,.‌​..}
15:14
@Secret and where are the blocks?
@Semiclassical I plotted; it really seems like you are tubing it up on each affine chart.
derp. I think I may have done wrong curve.
So you should get a, what, genus 3 subvarietyin P^2
Hang on.
OK. What you did does desingularize though.
15:18
@BalarkaSen I see. My topology professor also wanted to start an undergraduate alg.top. course next year but that's not sure yet
Yeah, I goofed somehow. That's not the curve I meant to be looking at, and now that I do it works fine.
What I was after was the following.
@Alessandro That'd really be nice. How much are you through G-P, yet?
Suppose I've got the (unperturbed) curve $F(x,y,z)=\det(Ax+By+Cz)$ where $A,B,C$ are 3-by-3 diagonal matrices. Since the polynomial factorizes into linears, this corresponds to some union of lines; i'll suppose that $A,B,C$ are such that the three lines don't have a common intersection, so that there's three double points. @BalarkaSen
the blocks appear when you put all possible f s together. e.g. for $\mathbb{N}\to \{0,1\}$ all possible fs are

{0,0,0,0,0,...}
{1,0,0,0,0,...}
{0,1,0,0,0,...}
{0,0,1,0,0,...}
{0,0,0,1,0,...}
{0,0,0,0,1,...}
and so on
{1,1,0,0,0,...}
{0,1,1,0,0,...}
{0,0,1,1,0,...}
{0,0,0,1,1,...}
and so on
{1,1,1,0,0,...}
{0,1,1,1,0,...}
{0,0,1,1,1,...}
and so on
{1,1,1,1,0,...}
{0,1,1,1,1,...}
and so on
{1,1,1,1,1...}
and so on
{1,0,1,1,1,...}
and so on
{1,0,0,1,0,...}
and so on
{0,1,0,0,0,1,...}
and so on
...
Please don't spam.
15:22
@BalarkaSen not very far, I've been distracted by physics (and other math) lately. I think the next topic is transversality but I still have a lot of exercises on immersions and submersions to do
If I now perturb $C$ so that it's not diagonal but still symmetric, then I generically expect all three of these double points to resolve. @BalarkaSen
What I was curious about was whether I could always find a subset of matrices $C$ for which only some of the 3 double points resolve.
@Secret what are the blocks corresponding to the function earlier?
@DHMO all possible values taken from the codomain
i.e. can I, at least for this 3-by-3 case, always find an algebraic perturbation which resolves some double points but not all.
@Secret what... I'm asking, how do you represent (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,...) in block form
15:24
@Alessandro I can recommend some exercises if you want.
What I meant to be doing in the case I described above was to have the three lines in the unperturbed case be $x=0$, $y=0$, $z=0$.
And it did have that, but the perturbation wasn't of the form I intended.
@Semiclassical Unfortunately I don't have much intuition for what you're doing with the det :)
Heh, fair enough.
@DHMO $(0,1,2,3,4,5,6,...) \in \{(x,x,x,x,x,x,...)\}$ where $x \in \{0,1,2,...,10\}$ so you have a countable number of blocks of size 10, right?
But in general checking on affine charts is a useful strategy
15:26
@Secret I thought $x \in \{0,1\}$
Ted sent me the exercises he assigned when he taught a course based on it (and some exercises he wrote) so I'm following those
Ah, right. I haven't done all of his exercises but I like some of them a lot
@DHMO if $x \in \{0,1\}$ the result will be just the uncountably many binary sequence, which form a $\aleph_0 \times 2$ "matrix" with blocks of size $2$
@Secret can you actually write the result out?
@Alessandro Since you're done with immersion/submersions, have you proved that if $Z \subset X$ is a submanifold then $Z$ is locally cut out from $X$ by functions?
15:29
Haven't I already wrote here? (you cannot wrote even a countable number of things down on paper as it takes forever, but the above is wrote with induction in mind, thus anything unwritten is actually written out. I have also wrote explicitly as many entries as I can to illustrate my confusion
http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/35123343#35123343
@Secret what is the block corresponding to $5$?
@BalarkaSen nope, I guess I should though
@DHMO $(,,,,\delta,...)$ i.e. $\delta$ at the 5th entry
@Secret I'm starting to feel like your function is $\Bbb N \to 2^\Bbb N$ rather than $\Bbb N \to \Bbb N$
@DHMO I am trying to write the set of all functions $f : \Bbb N \to \Bbb N$ (This is bijective to the set $\mathbb{N}^{\mathbb{N}}$) and the set of all functions $g : \Bbb N \to \{0,1\}$ (This is bijective to the set $\mathbb{2}^{\mathbb{N}}$) to illustrate my query about this "countable number o block" concept because it does not sound right, but if it does not sound right, I have no idea how to partition $\mathbb{Z}^+$ t complete the proof in Q7
15:35
I don't understand
@Alessandro Ok, so just to clarify I want you to prove that for any $p \in Z$ there is a neighborhood $U$ of $Z$ in $X$ such that there are smooth function $f_0, f_1, \cdots, f_k$ on $U$ independent at $p$ ($df_i$ are linearly independent functionals at $T_p X$) such that the zero locus $f_0 = f_1 = \cdots = f_k = 0$ is precisely $Z \cap U$ in $U$.
@Secret what is the third column?
@DHMO the general form of all functions as a sequence
What is the function?
@Secret shouldn't the number of blocks be $\Bbb N^\Bbb N$?
@DHMO no, domain is $\mathbb{N}$ thus the image will have $|\mathbb{N}|$ entries (can be shown by induction). Next each entry can take $|\mathbb{N}|$ possible values. So there are $|\mathbb{N}|$ number of $|\mathbb{N}|$ blocks
15:41
what....
making a total of $|\mathbb{N}|^{|\mathbb{N}|}$ functions
@Secret are you suggesting that $\Bbb N^{2^\Bbb N} = \Bbb N^\Bbb N$?
@DHMO No the only thing I said is there are $|\mathbb{N}|^{|\mathbb{N}|}$ functions of the form $f: \mathbb{N}\to \mathbb{N}$
@Secret what is {{0,0,...},{0,0,...},...}?
Hey guys I'm like to make some sort of a cheat sheet for me about hierarchy of mathematic groups as I'm from time to time quite confused, especially as I learn everything in german, do you have a reference to a site that shows, the hierarchy of: Ring, field, set, group,abelsche group etc.
15:44
@Aresloom sorry for the size, I can't find another image
oh that looks great..where did you get that?
@DHMO Assuming you mean $f: \mathbb{N}\to \mathbb{N}$, that is the set of all sequnces in this set. There are uncountably many of them
@Aresloom google search
what did you search..honestly I don't even know how I'd to google this question
@Secret your third column reads ((xxxx...)(xxxx...)....) where x=0 or 1
@Secret So I'm asking you, if all the x are 0, what is that representing
@Aresloom "group ring field axiom"
15:47
thx
{{0,0,...},{0,0,...},...} is just the set {{0,0,...}}

((xxxx...)(xxxx...)...) is a countable tuple and those (xxxx....) are the blocks I mentioned about. Each block (corresponds to the entries of the sequence) can only take one of the x inside
@Secret according to you, each possible ((xxxx...)(xxxx...)...) represents a function from N to N?
because in the first line, ((0)(0)(0)....) represents a function from Z to {0}
Yes, EVERY $|\mathbb{N}|^{|\mathbb{N}|}$ SINGLE OF THEM

e.g. ((xxx...),(xxx...),(xxx...)...) is the compact writing

an example is (0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,...) the zero function
@Secret so every block there represents a number in N?
for each function each (xxx....) in that compact writing can only take one value
@DHMO Yes
15:51
that's the problem
because there are 2^N possible blocks
how can it only represent N numbers?
the elements in the set of size $|\mathbb{N}|^{|\mathbb{N}|}$ is a sequence ((xxx...),(xxx...),...) where each (xxx...) is any number from $\mathbb{N}$ (but can only be one number at a time)
@Secret is ((1000...)(0100...)(0010....)...) representing (0,1,2,...)?
Yes
then what is ((1100...)(0100...)(0010....)...) representing?
@Ramanujan shalom
@BalarkaSen that sounds very similar to an exercise in G-P, I'll think about it
15:56
@DHMO you cannot do that, each block can only take one value. Perhaps the way you wrote it actually clarified things. The (xxx...) are of the form (...0000100000...). Since there are $|\mathbb{N}|$ of them, they are countable
@Secret thanks, it took so long.
so, what is next?
But is this ((1000...)(0100...)(0010....)...) legal at all. I mean we are writing things after each ...?
and ... is supposed to mean go on forever
it is legal because you say it is
or if you are not happy with it, write it like this:
1000....
0100....
0010....
...
Hi @DHMO
$\frac14=\infty-4\cdot\infty$ So $-\frac1{12}=\infty$ — robjohn ♦ Feb 22 '15 at 4:18
How?
@DHMO I mean, in formal mathematical proofs, how can we write this ((1000...)(0100...)(0010....)...) ? to represent any (...010....)?

« first day (2372 days earlier)      last day (2944 days later) »