#serious-discussion
1 messages · Page 14 of 1
neamesis, do you know what matrices are?
yea
non-traditional student, im actually 80 years old
wait, what
wut
quaternions 
non-traditional student, i am actually 12
i wanna hear_ u tell a joke when no ones, laughing in the background_
I'm actually 4 + 2i
Ohh moddddddssssssssssssssssssssss!
gonna save this one

but seriously
dont joke about this
mirza lost her account once coz someone reported her
for the same joke
yohan i am 18
wtf
dear discord
yikes
if u are reading this chat log
lies
i am of legal age to use your platform
i am not a middle schooler!
you're now old enough to be arrested 
lies
,w 2016!
what the hell
is the pop sci magazine not intended for younger population?
technically yes
actually he was reading TQFT research papers when he was 7
Do you understand kripke semantics shyshu
hog riderrrrr
considering the only kripke i only is from big bang theory, no
why do you think I'm learning japanese?
Ooo

wow
It's quantifying over accessible worlds

You have a set of world and to each world you have a set of accessible worlds
Ooo

And you say something is necessarily true in a world if it is true in all accessible worlds
interesting
And possibly true if it is true in some Accessible world
this stuff seems like it can be related to many worlds to some extent
Yes
what is this about?
This is modal logic
coz many world says every choice gives of a new world
and if something is true in that new world, it has to be true in every world that comes from every choice that was made in the universe that it stemmed from
I think math is nothing but a fragment of human intuition 

Brouwer memes for intuitionistic teens
blushysully creeps me out
https://open.spotify.com/track/5ZDfLQU9SdH67cHxbgQXlw?si=QqUyZc-7T8W0Bd01ofxvJg&utm_source=copy-link
This song is so good
Sure yohan
what this mean?
Means what it says innit
I was wondering about that actually
what is Not very ppl
it sounds like a status you have when you don't like interacting with other individuals
What is the point of pursuing math if it's just mindlessly reasoning about abstract nonsense
darq still has very active
But that's exactly what cat theorists do isn't it?
is active based on quality of comments?
abstract nonsense is fun
Duck, I keep making that typo
oh he's just Not Very Ppl
Yee
how did u get that
Paypalled mniip
LOL
There's no other way
did u sign an NDA
abstract nonsense is just an affectionate term anyways
it's not actually nonsense obviously
But like
I think mathematics, like a lot of human activities, is just curiosity that grows into passion
it's like if you're into it then do it; if not then try something else and see if you like it
I feel like things are just gonna get more and more abstract as you go higher and higher until they practically make no sense at all
darq asked for it in modmail so i guess he was trying to self-own?
that's not what most math is!
oh
And I don't want that
do you want not very ppl?

bc I like blue name
see?
I don't wanna look like a non
Maybe not all area of math
what's the purpose of the role
you don't want to look like a roblox guest?
no
But things like category theory and model theory
you already know enough math where all of it is abstract nonsense to the average person
can I get another role instead
it's a matter of perspective
those are like the only two areas of math that are like this
no
idt model theory is abstract nonsense
and they do have a lot of relevant meaning and concrete interpretation if you learn the language
it answers a lot of questions people have about the nature of mathematics
and asks a lot of new questions
i don't think the abstract category theory stuff is either, usually
again, it looks like it if you don't know the language
yeah abstract nonsense is just what category theorists call it to fend off competition /s
but good expositors (which we have here) can tell you why that's not the case
I think category theory is the art of revealing deep similarities between wide reaching areas of math
and that's why people like it
even if it becomes abstract very quickly
yes, i would also say that, but it's also a very useful toolkit for studying things that are more concrete
I also don't want to stop visualizing stuff
which is the way most people use it
everyone talks about this as motivation, but in the end I kind of feel like no one who does category actually cares about its motivations lol
but I feel like if you pursue topology or smth you're gonna have to do that sooner or later
again, in fields like geometry or analysis or dynamics, you're visualizing stuff constantly no matter how modern your work is (except maybe in modern algebraic geometry)
or in, say, algebraic topology
plz draw me a pic of a scheme, I need intuition
category theory is also visual af
just because you have to do algebraic things mostly doesn't mean you aren't constantly drawing pictures of what you're doing to help you
hence why i said modern algebraic geometry is an exception
category theory showed me visual not always good
then why are people so interested AT?
it's massively useful
yeah I totally wanna do this when I'm better at math
for one
yeah!
I get the impression that pure mathematicians don't care about being useful lmfao
also in some ways math is just the art of trying to find the right intuition
okay how about it beautifully combines two different fields
also idt there's as big a distinction between pure and applied mathematics as people make out
the boundary is extremely wishy washy
number theory is pure.. until it becomes applied
statistics is applied.. unless you do like theoretical work in statistics?
does it tho?
if you're not visualizing shit, isn't it just algebra at that point?
how is it not topology
I mean.. try visualizing half the stuff they talk about in topology
for the record, I know basically no algebraic topology
the visualization skill just comes with time
it's possible
and in some ways, learning math is the art of trying to get rid of bad intuition and hone good intuition in any field
I think that once you learn stuff, it feels a lot more tangible than you realize

you know what really would've gotten me hooked. there was one section in a differential topology script where the prof (rest in peace) starts talking about how the proof of insert theorem I can't remember doesn't involve anything of topological substance, but is more category theoretical and then he starts talking about how category theory can be used to prove multiple results we know about seemingly unrelated fields at the same time. I always found that paragraph an amazing advertisement for category theory.... but yeah so far I have yet to witness it, my experiences with cat theory afterwards have been rather underwhelming
and I feel like it's a shame
I love when math takes intuitive things and makes them rigorous
HELLO GAMERS
what's the point if I'm actively trying to make rigorous things intuitive?
I don't wanna do that
that feels pointless
rigor really isn't everything isn't mathematics, the point of mathematics is that you want to understand ideas correctly, and rigor is a stepping stone to do that, but if you rely too much on it, it also becomes sort of a crutch that prevents you from making big leaps
the point of doing things rigorously is that you develop good intuition for what will work and what won't and then once you make that conjecture, you already have a good idea of what it takes to prove it rigorously
after the fact once you decide something is probably correct then you can start formalizing it, but you only do that if your intuition tells you it will be useful in some way
You can't visualize 99% of spaces
I get that intuition can only take you so far so you need rigor to guide your intuition
but, like
it bothers me that, for example, continuty depends on the topology you choose
and in the discrete topology all functions are continuous
Intuition can be false, and so can proofs. Concrete computations are the only truth in this world.
that doesn't make sense to me
it also bothers me that we can view R as a vector space over Q (assuming axioms of choice)
maybe these examples are just extremes
but it's not like I'm very far into pure mathematics and I know about them
euler would work at faang if he was still with us
and I'm afraid it's just gonna keep getting worse the further you go
@storm sage
if you don't like math in like second year of undergrad then it's doomed
stuff gets way worse
I think this is just a case of not having your intuition developed enough
As Eric Tao said, one of the main benefits of rigor is it helps to build intuition
just a bunch of symbols at that point
how do you look at this and say "yea this make sense"
fake math
The fact that continuity depends on the topology you use is super intuitive to me
but you just visualize that as a bunch of disconnected points, so it's fine right?
a set is just a bunch of things with nothing like, gluing them together in one way or another
Because the topology is what makes a space a space. Without it you only have a cardinality
the topology tells you what's glued to what and where
exactly
so idk what wouldn't be intuitive about a discrete space having functions out of it be continuous. it's discrete
Thinking of it as, for example, "putting a different topology oh R" is helpful insofsar as you might be using the order of R to help define that topology but really you're just putting a topology on $\beth_1$
Poppy Lascelles
This is also super intuitive imo
Once your intuition is developed enough
Like this was weird the first time I heard it but it makes perfect sense to me now

ok, that actually makes a lot of sense
lol
So like, you won't stop seeing things that feel weird, but the thing is, it's generally only the boundary of your knowledge that things feel weird at
it makes sense ig, I don't know about intuitive
Because once you work with an initially weird thing enough you start to develop an intuition under which it makes sense
It feels intuitive to me
Just think of it in terms of field extensions
to simply view this as a space, aoc isnt needed
you only need aoc for a basis
It's not really R that's a vector space too. You're losing the order which is what arguably makes R R
aoc is for picking a basis
It's just Q[a basis for R\Q] where Q is viewed as unordered field
Remember: once you've forgotten the order there's no way to tell two transcendental numbers apart
They're just symbols really
This definitely tripped me up when I was first learning it but it feels super intuitive now
i dont see what this means
Hm maybe I'm thinking of this wrong myself
wtf, that also makes sense now
I mean like if a and b are two linearly independent transcendental numbers then Q[a] Q[b] and Q[x] are basically all the same thing
R over Q
oh yeah
thats true
but this is because they are defined as having no solution to any polynomial equation
So just think of R as a vector space as Q[uncountably many symbols]
oh yeah thats a question ig
Where the uncountably many symbols are a basis for the irrational numbers
how many more useful transcendentals do you think will be discovered during our lifetime
im saying none
because i have no imagination
This of course has the issue that it assumes you have a basis but it's how I like to think about it intuitively
Would proving Gamma is transcendental count
i cant spell
euler mascheroni is how you actually spell it
an unknown one
According to google
How many useful transcendental numbers have we even discovered
pi e what else
i know others
but dont know their uses
chaitin constant
and liouville constant
something with halting problem for first one
idk what liouville used for
there are some in analytic number theory, e.g. some values of the \Gamma function. also some constants there are conjectured to be transcendental (euler-mascheroni constant \gamma, some values of the riemann zeta function)
oh
dont we only know a countable number of transcendentals?
so how can there be uncountable real numbers

yes
do we?
the number of transcendental numbers is uncountably infinite

honestly im having a big brain moment
everything in our universe is apparently discrete it seems
it is
how many irrational numbers do we know mr jass
is there anything that can be uncountable irl
are at least, theorized to be
or are limits just a tool for calculations
coz QM
mr jass is so smart and ez to talk too 🙂
we know countably infinite number
meaning we can construct a countably infinite number
we can construct the reals
we know uncountable number of irrationals exist because the reals are uncountable by a diagonalization argument and reals-rationals is uncountable
we can construct the set of reals via equivalence classes
but any random real number exists but is most likely hard for us to construct
and we cant tell if its transcendental or not easily
we dont have a closed form construction for most transcendentals is the truth
i never claimed otherwise
you asked if there is anything that can be uncountable irl
idk ur the expert
no?
😦
there is an uncountable number of ways to say "hello world"
with human voice ?
or no sir
and we know sound is vibrations propogating through air
this is probably a discrete value
countable
because atoms are finite and fixed mass
not even u?
they are an abstraction ?
what?
my point in saying they are discrete is to say a lot of things are intuitive irl
so maybe the world can be described in a countable set
oh ok
but then you would stop using the reals?
just do everything in Q ?
and not get closed formulas for solutions to equations?
or you can use A I guess
i previously said maybe the reals are only used a helpful tool for computing
Wildberger has a video on rational trigonometry
similar to how the idea of randomness is
wildberger
yes
reals are used for computing often
limiting processes showing things are equivalent
all human perception is discrete, if you believe perception is done solely through neurons
i dont want to believe this
a computer being able to digitalize my perception would be crazy
wouldn't it depend on where the neurons are positioned?
wdym?
QM says no, but GR assumes we do
and GR works pretty well
GR?
yeah, lol
does the distance between neuron a and neuron b affect ur perception?
maybe lol
i bet that's why my reaction time is so slow
well only countably many are (the computable reals)
Not sure about that, electrical impulses tend to be continuous things
It’s not a binary on/off signal
ultrafinitist arent crazy
we only really care if the electrical impulse is above or below a certain threshold though
why do you say space discrete in QM ?
Speak for yourself 
Lol
coz plank length
did I spell that correctly?
the planck length doesn't really say stuff is discrete
it doesnt
but there is a limit to stuff we can measure
its more than qm quantizes often
which might say that measurable space is discrete
that*
it's very far from discrete in fact
you might even say its a continuum
it could be a continuum, but there's nothing that says it has to be
i was just saying that the negation of discrete means continuum
below a certain length is unmeasurable so it's only guessing
thank god i have a continuum of brain cells
would it be cool if irl was Mein Craft?
ah okay
the negation of discrete is inconspicuous
yeah it's independent of what we can test
im gonna bet that the world is continuous
because time feels that way
even though it might not be
actually I'm not sure it even means anything to say that the world is continuous
why not?
who said anything about scientific
I did
well we are having a discussion about truth
you did it after the fact
so science only makes sense
either way, continuity is "close enough" to discreteness for the vast majority of applications
we're literally talking about physics lol
that was an accident
huh
i'm sure physicists have modeled the world using plank length scale discretization
I wanted the conversation to go another way
you know how time travel is a concept
actually nvm ur right
is there a way to test for it?
but it doesnt work like that
I'll let u know
because you wouldve done it already
but it isn't 2025 yet
if some future instance of you time traveled to 2025
then you wouldve traveled there already
unless you are saying future you isnt you
always wondered what the fundamental difference between how we experience time and how we experience space is
smoke weed lol
I experience both at the same time
it seems weird that it's not like, symmetric
wdym symmetric
like one is not like the other
like, why is being tall attractive but fat unnatractive
it makes no sense
they're basically the same thing
okay that is a bad analogy
like how you can travel through space but it's very different from how you travel through time
Waffles are good
But
Not frozen
Either make or buy from a respected establishment
aaaaa
we are taking galois fields in my crypto class finally
finally math
now its my time to shine
jjkjk
waffle house owo
I was so disappointed when I found out waffle house didnt have chicken and waffles
Their waffles were definitely good though
yeah I don't think they have fryers, only grill
but nothing quite hits the spot like 2 am waffles after failing my cs exams 🙃
coding sucks
Idk I like it, I'm just not all that great at it
And it's fun making personal projects
programming is fun as like a casual thing
when there's expectations is when I nope out lol
In my high school CS class I made a program that takes an image and lowers the resolution
That was fun
i tried making an app first
but then i got bored and quit
algs/tcs is kinda cool tho ngl
idk if that counts as cs or math though
lmao amazing
?
have you met any?
wdym no one here is competent lol
i heard from some friends that are astrophysics phds is that they larp as flat earthers
and its not uncommon for people to do this online
actual trolls
seems to me then thaat they are not an "actual" flat earther
maybe not by typical definition but they can make strong arguments for a flat earth
If the earth isnt flat, how does Australia exist 🤔🤔🤔
if you are an expert in some topics you have the ability to do this
evolutionary biologist are best at this
the scientific narratives are so complicated sometimes that people can argue for conspiracy positions amazingly well
also for some theories its not necessarily that what they are saying is consistent with any science
but the theory they posit is very hard to refute
in that they make their own consistent theories counter to what is generally accepted
thanks, other notable programs include a game that measures how quickly you can type the alphabet and a camera app that spams my friend edward with emails every time it detects his face
Define spams
i set it to run detection twice per second to make the frame rate decent, every time it detects it sends 20 emails
20 lmao
i mean ig i could've done more but I'm confident in my own limits
it helps that he didn't check his email until like an hour after I showed him. he just liked that the camera put a green box around his face so he would stare at it lmao
what language were thse in?
lowresifier was java, alphabet game was C, camera was python (my first time working with openCV)
Do you guys use “unreproduceable”, “irreproduceable”, “non-reproduceable” or simply “not reproduceable”?
that's a good question
I think not reproducible is the safest
irreproducible is logical though
Unreproduceable sounds right when I think about it but then non-reproducible/not reproducible sound more right when I think about them
CNR
yeah unreproducible sounds right until I start thinking about it for more than a second
Reproduciblen't
and then it sounds really uncomfortable
tbh
if you just say something enough
and convince other people to say it
Yeah it's like the feeling of your tongue not fitting correctly in your mouth
Also you're welcome Eric for making you think about that now

the MIT quantum physics prof denotes the real part of a complex number as $\bR$e$(z)$
gmod
ew
Yet another sin committed by the physicists
Shyshu of the Golden Storm✓
Nothing wrong with Re(z), but the bold R is strange
Shyshu of the Golden Storm✓
ive never seen mathbb used for that purpose
always mathfrak
i have seen mathbb sometimes
$\mbb{Shyshu}$
riemann

yikes 
huh
\mbb{R}
\mbb is the default shortcut for \mathbb built into your preamble
yes which is nice
yo guys so I am doing some publicity on my TeX group, the TeXromancers
and also remember to upvote, more publicity means we get more people learning about the books :))
Awesome
so when evaluating the geometric multiplicity, of an eigenvalue, you dont count the 0 vector right?
because its not linearly independent when there is an eigenvector
the 0 vector is not an eigenvector
Aye grats on honorable potato! Thanks for the analysis help. 
why did this get hmmed @deep mango
no i am not
something about it was hollow...
Hola anemone
3 days!!!
FUCK YOU
don't listen to him, gmod
you can be cog in the wheels of capitalism
u know u want to
lol
i wont let him!
my friends have to be respectable
I can't
not atm
ask modmail

dont try to predict what i do
im what true randomness is like
lol
I don't feel like I truly enjoy anything atm
I guess that's right
maybe it's just depression
relatable
it feels like u have derealized from the world
a sort of numbness
Capitalism is cool tho
Mooleh mooleh
You’re just jealy-welly that moddy’s gonna be the next Jeff bezos (but with hair and a good personality)
capitalism isn't cool
it's just the best we have
and it's not even close to being good
I would take scavenging for food each day, wandering the lands all year round, painting on cave walls for no reason instead of capitalism any time of the day
fighting bears for fun, killing mammoths with the boys, domesticating literal wolves etc etc
u would hate this after 2 days of actually having to do it
it sounds like you're gonna die immediately
Idk what the difference between those is
like living off of wellfare
i think i just don't want to live off the grid after all
do you catch my drift ?
i mean like
living in a secluded place and not utilizing public goods or buying things
is that kendrick lammar ?
I heard he is getting back together with Kim
frankly, i dont know nor do i really pay attention to kanye kim pete shit
it is a mess
No you wouldn’t
Anyway capitalism is GREAT!!! MOOLEH MOOLEH
I love capitalism I get to steal people's money by giving them things
You're just projecting
I'm built different
I'm literally a cave man with glasses

Maybe
But also, maybe not
im fairly certain u will
.
some of us are made for this kind of lifestyle
hi ryc
i'm not overly fit or anything but i'm good at rigging things up and quick problem solving with limited resources
hello gmod
really? go do it then 
shyshu is a stochastic function 
it would be lonely to do it alone. we need to put together a crew
Yes, the entirety of the math server 
I refuse
That would be a disaster
to rival all other disasters
You have glasses????
u never sent us a selfie 
even tho u have seen my face
Yay
I did not D:
whaaa
I would send you a picture of me giving you the middle finger but one time I did that and someone made fun of my fingers
one sec
i wont do that
coz i have funny fingers
myself
Tbh all fingers look weird
yeah!
Do you have a callus from using pens and stuff?

Ayyy
sure lol
Happy
are you hot dark cue
Hi, am I too late getting hungry for math at my senior year of undergrad?
Like so far I've just did what I was requested in order to pass exams
But now I really want to do it all the time
Well I just think I should have started getting hungry earlier
quite possibly it wasn't until now that you started covering material that you find interesting
that's probably not that unusual
Exactly
lower level stuff can be quite boring
I found only real analysis and set theory fun in the lower level stuff, but everything else was meh so I didn't spend a lot of time on that
Now that I've done FA and topology I started to like everything (LA which I hated for example)
the instructor and textbook can make a huge difference between a blah experience and a great one
as well as your own mindset of course
Dude I swear if I taught a linear algebra class
It would be the most popular class at a school
How would you structure it
So let's say year long linear algebra class
I guess it depends on some other parameters. Is this intro to proofs as well, etc
But basically there's so much cool stuff in the subject and a lot of different angles
And my shtick would be to include as many of the angles as possible
but what is your focus
So I'll try to throw in some finite fields, combo applications
As well as the analysis side
systems of equations? linear maps? vectors? vector spaces?
I'd hope to see all of them
If I was teaching a semester linear class to people interested in math and have done like an intro proofs class@
The goal is to make people as conversant as possible in jumping between all those perspectives
I would spend lecture one and two on Treil first two chapters respectively
So maybe I might in class give one proof of something
And then I would do 2 lectures per chapter, one lecture would be what is in the book chapter like the theorems proofs etc and then the second lecture would be some kind of more advanced application of that concept
So maybe something in rep theory, analysis, etc
Would probably skip the proofs of stuff that’s not enlightening/difficult
Sorry trailed off, but yeah if I think that both the "linear maps" proof and the "matrix" proof of something are enlightening
Then I'd give one proof in class and one as a homework problem
Yeah but only the first time you see that kind of thing
Whichever works better for each
I don't know if I could teach a linear algebra class
I'd make it about geometric algebra compulsively
What's geometric algebra?
I support
Lol yeah Eric and I both get it.
Also Eric I should teach you some of the analysis-y stuff, combo
Like the raw theory is cute but really
It's a difficult task to teach LA
What you can do with the stuff blows it up tenfold
My professor added for some reason interpolation in his linear algebra book....
Why not? It’s a nice application of the ideas of linear algebra
Eric have you seen Lagrange multipliers?
Well he didn't cover it in class, it was covid time so we had no class
tldr I was trying to remember the formula just out of the book without any intuition for it
There's a very nice proof of the spectral theorem via Lagrange multipliers
what is it 👀
Hahaha thats funny
When i taught LA i did find that topic to be a difficult one for students
i think i know the proof via induction
Yeah
Oh??? 👀
The idea is that for a symmetric matrix, the orthogonal complement of an invariant subspace is invariant
So your task is to produce an eigenvector
One way is to say, oh eigenvalues of a symmetric matrix have to be real, FTA gives us one, and we have rank insensitivity to field extensions
There's also Rayleigh quotient business
Rayleigh quotients scare me
I saw the formula
For the Sturm-Liouville equations in 3D
But one slick thing is to say is
Maximize the quadratic form Q(x) = <Ax,x> over the unit sphere
wait the RQ definition is so simple in linear algebra??
wtf
it looked so convoluted in my pde textbook
oh that's a neat idea
also just wondering, are there any spectral-like theorems for vector spaces that aren't inner product spaces
super cool dami
Hmm
So my instinct is this
If you think about the standard proof
Using LM
It feels like a big part is compactness of the unit ball and the fact that orthogonal complements of invariant subspace are invariants
yeah I was thinking it'd be hard to translate anything over
also wow I need to learn more about rayleigh quotients
I didn't know they were a thing in linear algebra
man if I ever ta linear algebra, I need to spam my kids with these
I'll think about it in a sec, I'm a little busy rn
I see how there would be a connection though
I remember maximizing the Laplacian using eigenvectors for some graph theory application :))
i think your general idea makes sense
but how do you do it with rayleigh quotients?
<x, Ax> is maximized when the rayleigh quotient is (assuming <x,x> = 1)
The quick version is that you compute lim_{t->0} (Q(x+tv) - Q(x))/t = 2 <Ax,v>
So the gradient of Q is 2Ax
While the sphere is defined by <x,x>-1=0 which has gradient 2x
So max of Q must be an eigenvector of A by LM
But obv the max exists by compactness
I don't remember Rayleigh stuff offhand super well but I could prob figure it out?
Here's something in combo
Let's say you have a town with 32 people
They love forming clubs
Like they just want to register clubs for no reason, including having many with the same members
Paperwork is getting out of control
So we put some rules
♣️
Every club must have an even number of people
Every pair of clubs must have an even number of people in the intersection
No duplicates
Have we solved the problem?
I guess I'll go ahead and say, the answer is no
We marry the 32 people into 16 couples
Every subset forms of a club
So 2^{16} clubs at least
wait i think ive seen this lol
or something similar
but i think for a town with odd people

Yeah so
If we now say every club must have an odd number of people
Well now we know there can't be duplicates
And in fact
Exercise
There can be at most 32 clubs
and every two clubs have an odd number of people in the intersection?
or an even number?
oh boy time to learn about this, I skipped it the first time around
Lol
You're about to become woke
you only need to see tensor algebras quotiented by relations once to get the point
when i teach my first proof based undergrad course imma ask them to prove that any even integer other than 2 can be written as the sum of two primes
just in case you know
2 = 1 + 1
i edited it first u cant do that
i had it typed before you edited so get fucked lol
goldbach conjecture
it's still a conjecture?
yes
bruh, I almost wasted time on this
we suck at number theory

attempting a hard problem is never a waste
okay wiles

okay CV
lmfao
I remember that!
wait, he got banned???
What a drastic simplification of the CV narrative
whyyy
i WAS going to go into detail, ryc, but now i don't want to
one day CV is gonna prove collatz and the mods will rue the day
lol I wanna hear this story now
Broke server rules pretty severely
This is not up for discussion
Lol
in the acknowledgements: "ryc doubted me, and I want the world to know"
what CV did to get banned is not for discussion, but what CV did to earn mine and many others' ridicule is
I don't wanna discuss it, I just wanna no what the reason is 
isn't that the definition of discuss
he helped me with an analysis problem once I think
Yes thats fine
darq just pretend they got banned for being a collatz crank okay
ok 
that sounds so shady I don't even wanna think about what they did
time to think about multilinear maps instead
It was some nsfw stuff in the discussion channels that was far over the line, but im not talking about the content of it.
thats when the a goes in and out, you can thank me later
oh
if you're talking about the one I was talking to
yes i was
oh, I saw that lmfao
I figured
remember when we all argued about if .99999... = 1 with that one guy for like hours
that was a good time
I stopped reading CV's messages that exceeded 3 lines so I only noticed waht he was writing until mniip was like "bruh, too far" 
Lol
yes it is
"I stopped readinf cvs messages that exceeded 3 lines" is a good tagline for this memoir
lol
i get so lost in the sauce when people change their pfp. ong I didn't know who ryc is for days after he changed his pfp
0.999... is indisputably in the monad of 1
this means, if we take it to refer to a Real number, it can only be 1
It's worse when someone changes their name and profile pic and you never know who they are again
mom I'm a real number now!
that's not what transfinite means
There was someone a few months ago with the name "something CAT" all in caps and they were nice but I've no idea who they are now
Im glad I committed to the change tbh
The meme bird was a brand
yeah this one is better
oh did that new AI make it?
neat!
darq werent you blue at some point





