#serious-discussion
1 messages · Page 500 of 1
they kinda can, provided they are doing other work
papers that length do come out not uncommonly
True, I think most people are just struggling and working on a few things though
the tensor product of FG with respect to FH and V is isomorphic to the induced module V arrow G
is how I'd read it
true
I dare not post my proof... just in case 
group theory, lin algebra
and by lin algebra I mean fuckin lin algebra
none of this row-echelon bullshit
that's for the rep theory I'm doing anyway
so tensor stuff
for anything more advanced you'll probably need ring theory and maybe even algebraic topology if you're doing lie group shenanigans
tensor stuff, abstract inner product spaces, and other nonsense
😵💫
OH and a very small amount of field theory
you just need to know how to exploit algebraic closure basically
gonna learn that someday
♾️
wait no
this does't make sense if the thing I think is a typo is actually a typo
however

it also doesn't make sense the way the paper is written 

hello chat
ok I think I'm just going to email them
time to surrender
nah, just reopen or open a new help channel
kk
starting undergraduate college soon this fall, planning on doing a major in physics and a minor in CS
career goal is to do some form of quantum computing research
two questions:
- how useful would a math major/minor be along with physics major?
- how many math classes would overlap between physics/math requirements? Until what year would they start to differ?
asking here and not in the physics server because as a wise person once said in #chill ,
also i just really love math
so if i did a math minor, would i still get to do all the rigorous fun higher-level classes as a math major
for reference im currently doing calculus 3 so i may be able to test out of calc 1-3, depending if the school will let me
wise blo
agreed
I feel like phys major/CS minor is a good combo if your goal is quantum computing research, the few people I know that did math/phys double major or similar ended up in mathematical physics though I'm not sure how much that overlaps with QC
certainly you'll get a better understanding of the (mathematical) fundamentals of QC if you've already taken higher-level math courses
ye
👍
i just kinda want to take higher level courses in math just out of enjoyment tho
so not necessarily for the end goal of a degree in math or anything but purely just because "wow this is cool and fun"
at which point would it be worth to go for a math major/minor too?
yeah I get that and it's a good reason if it's something you can do
I feel like a CS minor would be obvs more useful (algorithms)
ye, i think CS minor will be there regardless of math major/minor or no math major/minor
while a math minor/major would be a nice plus but not sure if worth it
just a question of whether it's worth to take on that third course path
maybe it'd be better to hear from someone actually into QC lol
mm true
im just wondering like
how much extra course load im looking at if i did Physics + CS + Math instead of just Physics + CS
all of these would require the basic calc+linalg sequence , so probably only as much load as the respective minors require you to take
I feel like the three don't really overlap in undergrad but have the same prereqs
like, if you wanted to do real analysis, algorithms and something like analytic mechanics on the same semester, these have pretty much no overlap except in that they all assume you know calculus
still 
ye, i will probably reach out to respective professors and whatnot depending on the school i commit to

What is a good method to speedrun hard books?
Absorb Textbooks Like a Sponge. Discover how to IMPROVE COMPREHENSION and GET BETTER GRADES, while REDUCING STUDY TIME. Reading a textbook is NOT like reading a novel. You will learn an EASY & PROVEN METHOD for getting the information from any textbook to go straight into your brain, without having to cram or underline a bunch of stuff. It ta...
blackbox all the results
and all the proofs
don't do any exercises
(in case it is unclear, this is bad advice)
dont without good reason
good reason = need it for a research paper but only have to cite it and get the gist
does good reason also include cramming last minute for a test
no
shit
Lmao
stressed because need to work on applications, hard to work on applications because stressed 

Please don't
What does speedrunning a textbook look like try to do all the exercises as quickly as possible?
Yeah it’s weird
Actually that sounds fun I wonder if speedrun.com has a category for Dummit & Foote
I guess if all you care about is the exam then just focus on what’s relevant
like perhaps skip certain sections
idk
How would you even define the rules though
Like if you’ve done all the material before it becomes a question of how fast you can write stuff down
Wait does anyone actually read textbooks cover-to-cover? I've almost only ever read sections relevant to classes and personal interests, or sometimes the first third-to-half of a book if it's for a course.
what time do you think you can get rn zorn for any% DnF?
I do
i thought that was the only way to read a textbook
maybe thats why it takes me so much time
i read like every word

I have read a few from cover to maybe 90%
Dude textbooks will often put in "here's what chapters you can use to structure a course and what you can skip"
i always ignore that lmao
It’s mostly just for texts that are of general interest
I mean the extra info may be useful
yeah of course
Yeah because texts that aren't of general interest if you know enough to read them you know enough to sort through to find what you need and are interested in
but its like when i read some parts which were pretty boring and were so irrelavent that ive forgotten about
100% DnF is the speedrun to go for. I think I can get it in a month, if I can find a way to not need to sleep
dnf = df?
This is really silly and counterproductive
It's an objectively terrible idea. That's why I'm entertaining it instead of doing my invariant theory homework
Ah makes sense
counterproductive is my second name
I took you seriously lol
Yeah I've been crunching for like 5 hours at this point and I still have a bit that I want to do tonight I'm just goofing off because goddamn I need a break
I have seriously considered it. The only reason I haven't is that the coke where I live is often cut with fentonyl and I know some guys who ODed and died from that shit.
Remember to also use variables to refer to people
i cant tell if youre being sarcastic or not rn
Maybe. I was diagnosed with autism when I was young and I've heard it's often comorbid, and you're not the first one to suggest I might have adhd.
3 guys on the floor of my dormitory freshman year. One of them was dating my best friend. It wasn't a fun time.
Yeah unless prescribed by a medical professional
Lol I'm fairly sure I have autism, I've been putting off getting diagnosed
sorry for your loss
Eh he was an abusive shithead anyway
I scored well within the range on the raads-r recently
I was also diagnosed with ADHD like last week lol
I think I have some form of anxiety issues
Actually wait maybe he's alive and was just hospitalized and expelled for misconduct, I actually didn't care enough to check in on him
Also I was diagnosed with general anxiety, social anxiety, and major depression
Anyway don't do drugs and if you do make sure you only buy drugs from a reputable drug dealer and for the love of god test your stuff before you do it to make sure it doesn't kill you

Anyway back into the invariant trenches I go, which actually requires a fair bit of representation theory actually wait maybe I should try to learn representation theory at some point that sounds fun
the sad thing about math is like "wow a looks super cool" then a has prerequisite b which has prereq c which has prereq d which is something horribly boring
what you mean I can't just learn all math from numberphile and 3b1b!!!

"Commalg is dry and boring but alg nt and alg geo are super fun" is one I've heard a bunch but I actually really like commalg (at least what I know of it so far). I think it's just a matter of making sure it's well-motivated enough.
:)
Honestly it works through highschool
applications in getting lost in the forest and then further getting lost within a tree in the forest
lmao fax
As bookkeeping devices go trees are pretty based
i mean more like im learning analysis rn for complex analysis for something that i forgot
but analysis is not boring at all tbf
Also posets of finite partial functions on the naturals are good
combinatorics based
Lol
Eh just skip to smooth manifolds you can fill in the basics as you go
I think naturally your taste of what you thought was boring can eventually become fun or interesting over time so I sorta go that route
Wait maybe I'm getting manifolds and riemann surfaces mixed up. I do that sometimes
I took the raads-r test
Yeah that's what happened. Not sure why I keep conflating them, but I meant riemann surfaces and not smooth manifolds.
Attitudes around self diagnosis are really weird
On the one hand I fucking hate psychologists and psychiatrists almost as a rule and actively discourage people from seeking "mental health professionals" who only make things worse, on the other hand lots of people will use a self-diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome as a justification for just being an asshole.
I was talking to someone recently who claimed to have did, and I really wasn't sure whether to believe them or not, they were self diagnosed and also they changed the story they were telling me quite often
And it seemed like they were recycling some stuff that I said into their story
Sometimes I pretend to have Munchausen Syndrome to get attention
At the end of the conversation they had an episode where they acted like they were being one of their alters, and it really freaked me out
Bannanachair why did you add me

WAIT
idk how autism diagnosis helps but I am most probably autistic looking at this score 😕
I mean it helps with understanding yourself
I do not know what tf2 is but I should probably change my pfp then.
I actually had munchausen as a kid lol
Oh I guess it's some videogame from the 1990s according to google?
It was really bad
from 2008
wait no
2007
Wait I see what happened it's saying tf1 is from the 90s and tf2 is the sequel
Still old by videogame standards I thought
I faked being sick for a month and actually spent a week in a hospital at the end of it
I faked being sick so that I wouldn't have to go to school for several months in highschool
I don't know how to respond to that. I'm debating internally between something weird and witty and something more heartfelt but can't pull off either correctly.
so I could stay home and play runescape
I hated school so much lol
yeah I considered it mostly a waste of time
Well in my case they forced us to learn hebrew studies for 5 hours a day
gag
Until university school is at best glorified babysitting
And I was constantly verbally harassed and physically bullied
that's worse

I feel really weird going to doctors now, like I'm always afraid I'm making shit up or something
haha
Whenever I fill out a form about myself I'm always afraid I'm lying
I've had some really dumb doctors visits
I don't even want to think about it but, you know when you are paranoid about something but turns out to be nothing
I guess better to be safe than sorry
Yeah I've had that, I think that's fine though
there's worse but I don't want to mention it haha too embarassing
I have so many weird health concerns
I am currently long overdue to go to the doctor, eye doctor, and dentist
I'm overdue for eye doctor and dentist
just meaning I need to get better glasses
thankfully I am able to rationally recognize that I worry about health shit for no reason so I haven't gone to the doctor about them.
But I think I just hold a lot of tension in my body and then worry about it.
I don't worry about health shit at all for the most part
me either, that's what makes avoiding going so easy
Except for when I worried about something for like 2 years and avoided going and when I did it turned out to be nothing
actually this is not entirely true. I asked my doctor about a weird thing where I was feeling my heartbeat in my stomach/diaphragm area
I don't even ever take pain medication lol
was worried it was some strange palpitation thing
but it turned out to be nothing of concern
I've been smelling cat poop for like an hour
I just moved the cat trash can away lol
It was like a foot from me
I had something similar, my doctor was slightly worried and had me get an ultrasound to check it out to be sure, but was nothing
when I was a kid
That's good
I'm honestly starting to seriously think the ultimate source of all this stress/tension/anxiety is dysphoria
they said it was just normal if you're tall and skinny
I feel like I can never be definitively sure about anything and people acting in bad faith are going to exploit that all the time
because enby + no desire for hrt or surgeries
it's stupid though
the idea of trenders that is
It's not if you already have your beliefs and you need ideas to justify them
ok yeah stupid in an abstract philosophical sense
I hate my family so much lol
it's a very effective way of justifying transphobia in a way that's difficult to easily shut down
It's just unfalsifiable and sounds good
is it unfalsifiable?
now i can take a deep breath and exhale - that i have math buddies who help
I think with a few reasonable assumptions you could falsify it pretty easily
The same rhetoric has been used with slight variation for basically every LGBTQ group
and I think some people already sorta have?
what's annoying is when trans people unironically believe in the trender shit
like bru
h
Yeah that's because trans people are transphobic

Well a lot of them are
Sorry I'm saying that in a too general way
Should I go into detail about what I mean or do you understand
Well in my case I just wouldn't let myself think about any trans concepts at all
And I made a lot of assumptions and didn't bother actually confirming any of them
I had such a basic understanding of trans stuff for so long
like I legit
5+ years ago
remember thinking
"damn it would be really cool if I could be neither a man nor a woman. Shame that's not possible though"
I thought the same thing when I was 15 but just for women
and like I vaguely knew enby was a thing, I just didn't know anything about it
Lol I read this book called treason when I was like 11 and it made me feel so good
In it a male main character has a birth defect where he grows a bunch of body parts and he passes as a woman for a while

It's actually by Orson Scott Card lol
Yeah
or am I thinking of someone else
He's a Mormon
what is it with Mormons being really good but problematic fiction authors
like isn't Brandon Sanderson also a Mormon
less so now
Why was he problematic
but Mistborn eras 1 and 2 has some questionably written female characters
I feel like that's not a good reason to view someone as problematic
like there's a character who's an 18 year old girl whose only purpose in the story seems to be seducing a 36 year old guy
which leads to absolutely no plot relevance later down the line
Oh right her
I think so?
but it's weird because the age gap
which also keeps being brought up
maybe problematic is slightly to strong a word for Brando Sando
I mean it's weird but I don't think it's inherently problematic
Yeah I think it's too strong
just maybe a bit questionable
oh my god Marasi though
from era 2

like strictly speaking there's nothing wrong or problematic with the character
but also
the amount of times he wrote "Marasi blushed" is slightly obscene
it was fun
Ah okay
really I just don't read anywhere near as much as I should
I am reading bell hooks the will to change rn
I'm insanely bad at reading nonfiction
Especially stuff where there's room for me to say "but I don't know if this is actually true"
The ambiguity kills me every time
the issue for me is the stuff I want to read is extremely dense
but I don't have that much of a capacity for dense reading
but I had a period over last Winter break where I got into reading fiction again
Well if it's scientifically backed I can
But if it's something that can't be shown conclusively I can't deal with it
It's just a mess
My dad took advantage of this when I confronted him about my childhood stuff
see this is why I like math and philosophy
But he literally was like "you can't disprove the existence of magic"
I'm not joking there
He actually said that
you don't need much evidence besides what is inherently contained within the statements.
Because he believes in magic and that he can do magic
Yeah that's a big reason that I like math too
emma are you a logician or a horse
So my dad used to do a thing where he would pull money out of a hat and act like he materialized it out of thin air
And that the act of doing so hurt him
So he was literally hurting himself physically to provide for our family
I am both
hey stinkies hows it hangin
Anyway my mom actually believed him, and it seems like she still believes him
about antilog
how
what is antilog
wait so Emma
did your dad honestly think
that his magician act
was him actually doing magic
Yeah so it seems so
But he actually raised us to believe that he could do magic
since you're, you know, doing it
Like this is a long term thing
He has consistently said he can do things, he and my mom have told us stories of him doing magical things, other people that they know who also believe in magic have said that he can do things
So it's very hard for me to definitively say that he can't
Even though he obviously can't
It's a really weird situation
This is one of the ways that he gets to act like he's incredibly special even though he's a total failure in every aspect of his life
My little brother fully believes that my dad can do magic, and actually it seems like he believes he can too now
It's very strange
But yeah with respect to the hat thing, I personally didn't see it but he apparently showed an empty hat to my mom and then pulled money out of it
Yeah that's the thing
but that doesn't ultimately really matter
But it does if you want to hold someone accountable and they won't accept that they did anything wrong
right I'm saying that it doesn't ultimately matter that you can't definitively prove anything
I know
because for all intents and purposes you absolutely can
The thing is that I was raised on beliefs that are incredibly marginal
magic, at least of the form that would allow you to create money in an empty hat, pretty clearly doesn't exist
Like rejecting things because they are implausible is at total odds with my fundamentalist education
indoctrination moment
And also it removes any plausible deniability I can give to my family for their harmful beliefs
i pray god i get the power of you guys in socializing
So yeah, I'm kinda at an impasse where I have to accept a bunch of beliefs as plausible even though they obviously aren't, or I have to actually try to reject beliefs that I've been trained to think are plausible for a ton of years
And obviously the second one is the better option but it's really hard and it makes me feel like shit all the time
religion is weird
And there are real world consequences in how I can act around people in my family
Yeah I know
my prof said in class today that he talked to some leading Catholic theologian who basically said "yeah obviously Hell doesn't exist"
and that the concept of Hell was basically just a lie you tell ignorant people because they're not sophisticated enough to understand the truth
that the real punishment for not loving God is being forever denied his presence
not Hell
Oh lol
or at least according to this person
Sounds like this person really believes in what he's saying
I actually forget if this is what the person believed or if that is what they thought the correct interpretation of Catholic thought was
That is so fucking funny actually
also I think they were a she?
women don't exist 

I did notice that I had assumed but didn't care enough to correct and just hoped I was right lol
Anyway yeah so my mental health is pretty bad rn
But hopefully eventually it will be better

I proved a thing my advisor gave me as a mini project and it ended up being trivial modulo reading some papers
I do have a much better grasp on the topic now though, but I feel shitty because I feel like I didn't do anything
It turns out that I wasn't appreciating the difference between viewing things internally to a larger Computable thing vs externally enough
And my advisor gave me a bunch of problems that made me appreciate this, and that appreciation made me able to see what I needed to do for this mini problem

So that's good I guess
But I still feel like I haven't accomplished anything
I've basically finished reading one
modulo understanding a few details on some of the proofs
an REU
I made the short list so now they want to get a sense of how I approach mathematical reading
Lol I'd like to know how to approach mathematical reading
I just read things and once I get excited I know what to do

My approach is very analogous to bashing my head against a brick wall repeatedly
not sure if that's optimal
Every time I get assigned like 10 pages of homework a week in one class I realize I'm getting my revenge on the professors by turning it in at the last minute and forcing them to do 10 pages worth of grading each week
Anyway it only took me another hour but I'm done with this homework for tonight which means I don't get a new problemset in this class until tomorrow
Which is today it's 1AM and I have class in the morning (not this one) bye
Yes
Lol I don't want to though
Rip off the bandaid, get it over with
oh also
I think I'll go to sleep and do it in the morning
I'm pretty sure the paper I'm reading is like a preprint or something
since the wording is kinda
at times
see my rant earlier today about it pulling two functions out of its ass for a proof without definition
I wonder if my advisor will let me see the paper he's working on about Hilbert's 10th problem for generic fields
I should ask him
He hasn't even posted a preprint yet
He proved that for generic subfields of \bar Q Hilbert's 10th problem for that field is equivalent to the field itself
But that assumes you have an embedding into \bar Q, which is basically the same thing as assuming you have a root algorithm or an algorithm to tell is a polynomial over the field is irreducible
If you don't then be showed there are generic fields with no algorithm to tell if the field is irreducible
Huh I guess you can probably show that Hilbert's 10th for those fields are low relative to the atomic diagram of the field
I guess that's cool

Probably he proved that sort of thing in his paper that he hasn't shown me
But that's just a trivial observation from knowing that there is a low embedding of your generic field into \bar Q
I guess that isn't really the result I expected for Hilbert's 10th for generic fields but that's still nice

Oh he literally says this in the slides I was looking at
Smh
I am incapable of reading things sometimes
have u been literally chatting with urself?
you don't?
Is there a way to trace an intersection point in desmos?
Currently I have the variables change in time and it's drawing out a nice curve but I want to see it move on it
@me
Tell Ringo I say hello
Ringo’s out
Anyone wanna help me with this assignment?
https://i.imgur.com/u4DSnXc.png
I will be providing you with a set of questions to answer.
I'm an adult trying to learn math. I don't want to go the textbook/youtube route. I think I would learn much better if I had an actual teacher I could do lessons with. Is that a thing nowadays?
what'd be the most cited papers in maths
If it's feasible for you, you could enroll in something like a community college that offers math classes?
Private tutoring is also an option but you'll probably have to lay out a concrete goal beforehand then
I've thought about that, but it looks like college classes are just in person lectures with homework, rather than a personal teacher i get to ask a lot of questions to
like the youtube/textbook route in real life.
I think instructors can often be really supportive and answer your questions after class hours. Plus learning with peers seems like an advantage for many people, it even helps in productive discussions.
there are probably books with a bajillion citations
harthsorne or something
google says its this though
if u follow a reasonable definition of math paper
C. E. Shannon, A mathematical theory of communication, has 72774 citations
not a paper but still thats a lot of citations
yep
Says mr jane street
you know this ivy league loser could get jane street in his sleep
Hi friend jesse. How do I get jane street. I like money
🤑
🤑
chm is kidding i dont work at jane steret
i have a less prestigious internship
Wall street?
No, software
Wait
I legit thought you were interning at Jane steeet or something isomorphic this summer
fwiw I don't think it's actually that difficult to get a job at a lower ranked HFT place if you are good at maf
citadel/jane street/2sigma are omega hard cuz of the name
but like HRT/SIG hire from "lower" ranked schools pretty often
like i get their OA's everytime I apply
No Chm I'm at a sofware company 
@atomic hornet im sorry for being mean
thank u for the... information
get it. cause Shannon
Maybe you should learn some history ..
that was rude shin
I'm sorry
It's because Claude Shannon was a founder of the field of Information theory
I was making a pun
:)
Very cool. Why though? What motivates you? Any particular problem/theorem?
I'm gonna be doing algebra research next sem with a homological algebraist
And I find the theory cool
It was the nost enjoyable part of AT for me
Granted I haven't gone far
is trategy not a word why not
it sounds like to describe something trategic, like a bad thing
see 'tragedy'
it’s a tragedy that you forgot that word

does it make any sense at all to write:
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \bZ_n = \bZ$$
gmod [gmod gang]
oh true
anyone got any tips on how to get a grade 9 in gcse's, im currently working at a 7/8
ok so then N

kinda reminds me of a completion
No
a completely ill defined completion
There are a few notions of limits of groups
rip
But
totally know what that means
Idk if any of them make sense here
ignored
what relationship
idk what that is lol
#serious-discussion message I'm gonna cry
just a little though
the relationship between Z/nZ and Z is that Z/nZ is a quotient of Z
boooommm
shed a tear
lmao
hey uh what can i do for this question?
you can go to #❓how-to-get-help
Have you tried the Arc length formula?
practice papers
i'm really just guessing, but since $n\bZ$ ``tends to'' ${0}$ (in the loose sense that $k \neq 0$ is eventually never in $n \bZ$), if anything you'd have $$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\bZ}{n\bZ} = \frac{\bZ}{{0}} \cong \bZ$$
∧res
so probably? idk
is there easy simple way to say what \cong means
"it's the same thing, you're just relabelling the elements"
like, elements of Z/{0} are really cosets that look like n + {0}
but you can identify them with n
but if you're looking for a word, it's isomorphic
you'll see isomorphism defined in a technical way, like 'a bijective homomorphism', but it's probably one of the most natural ideas in maths
so e.g. there's an isomorphism between {the integers with addition, written using arabic numerals} and {the integers with addition, written using roman numerals}
or for a more useful example, an isomorphism between the groups Z and Z defined by sending every number to its negative
because if you take the number line and flip it around, addition still looks the same
yeah
isomorphism is so natural that it's like the one thing everyone knows exactly what it means
you start to get a feel for stuff instead of just identifying by name
this naturalness is basically reflected in stuff like category theory which is pretty interesting
isomorphisms, unless defined in an unusual way, are fundamental to how objects of theories sit together on the level of categories
like, "actual" isomorphisms and not just things someone misleadingly named that
so in the category of topologies the isomorphisms are homeomorphisms, because otherwise it isnt what we want to mean by isomorphism really
which is that it carries some qualities of the objects of topology
in the category of sets we need them to only be a bijection
though there may be like, category of ordered sets idk
you first learn about it really in abstract algebra but its a general sort of term
in abstract algebra it just needs to be bijective and preserve some operations, tho we have theorems that make it nicer to prove
isomorphism is like. 'these things act the same way'
yeah
"in this situation they are the same"
identity is like being isomorphic in every way, it's the strongest form of equivalence
well in regular math
zfc stuff you do by hand
what an ominous statement
there's models where equality isn't the strongest equivalence?
maybe models isn't the right word technically but
well maybe not that but that equality isnt always given as readily
and may have to be shown in weird ways, idk it's all this automated proving stuff
we kinda think of it as basic and acting nice i suppose
when it's not so clear when you loosen some notions up or dont take some things as given
sort of like negation elimination in intuitionistic logic
not being in it, that is
i am sure there is also mathematics where equality is very weird
beyond any tricky automated proof program
you probably dont even have to get into any meme math either
Hehehe
lol
Is there a guide for commands?
what's not how what works
but isomorphisms dont work too
tbh i wish i knew more about the logic than "idk some things arent as nice sometimes"
it's more an issue of proof methods than the actual equality i guess
but you can almost certainly even change that, probably to awful effects lol
i believe the issue is that equality isnt always reflexive, and you may need two different "paths" to get to each direction of an equality
reflexive in terms of how its proof is validated
That sounds strange
something like that can sound strange, and i am explaining it poorly i am sure, but we do get two very different proofs for two directions of a relation others times too
well so, i should be more careful
it probably isnt an issue with equality itself but proving the equaliy
equality
If we're talking normal numbers
or even sets/other stuff
The equality certainly is bidirectional
Your proof writes
a=b
=c
=d
=e
it will end up being true, but is not given for free
so you need two different ways to validate something we tend to take for free in the usual math
Ok ok, I see.
but it's an issue about what things we can take for free, so here is a historical example
in usual problem solving logic and first order logic we take that if a statement like "A is false" and find that the statement is false, then A is true
so it has to be either false or true
so "A is false" is false, means A is true
in intuitionistic logic you cant assume this
???
I see - the concepts are getting deeper than what I know
i am shittily explaining issues of logic, and i believe flubbed that part
i was trying to explain paths as in hott without actually talking about homotopy
as an idea of where rules of inference arent as generally nice
Identity in hott is still an equivalence relation
yeah i meant that it is true, but that you may need to show it in a different way than "reverse the steps"
it is possible that i am the one confused on the issue
You go backwards along the path
is it that paths are not unique?
That much is true (in general)
yeah but isnt there a specific issue of hott that has to do with the non-interchangeability of paths?
so in classical math we generally take readily that once equality is shown once there is no more issues
That's because classical math isn't proof relevant
In classical mathematics, your system "forgets" the proof used to prove whatever theorem you care about. In hott, proofs are kept around and themselves are considered mathematical objects.
This isn't really my field though so I someone like clerk or mniip could explain better
It's also because you keep your proofs around that hott's identity isn't actually a weakening of equality (where it would be in a more traditional framework).
that shows up in a bunch of whacky classical stuff
like when doing complex analysis to prove the various properties of the riemann zeta function
well, to expand out certain things
iirc
it's a pretty nice constant that seems to show up near complex analysis infinite products
Replace "whacky" with "beautiful", and this is true.
it is very beautiful and good stuff to read as you get thinking about more advanced stuff
Really, though, it offends me that we haven't proven its irrationality yet.
but some of it is also magic, kind of amazing when you are like an undergrad
Someone needs to go tell the algebraic/arithmetic geometers "You don't get to play around with the Langlands program until you've helped the rest of us prove macaroni's irrationality".
"Eat your vegetables"
lol
convert all mathematical resources to macaroni constant
it will be like the covid medical science programs in scale but for math and this one thing
when i first read about the riemann zeta function for reals it was a classical complex analysis book
the latest edition was like 1920
but i think the earliest was 1800s
Awesome.
and i think that was a good thing to read because you dont get this impression with a class book
Whittaker and Watson, perchance?
A classic.
that was it
it's a little tough to work through at times but it also presents material in this different way
Wait did someone say Langlands
it's interesting because some content is presented as a named result like the keyhole domain (i cant remember whose name is associated with it in the book)
now it's generally just "keyhole domain" or something similarly bland
Yes.
Algebra folks shouldn't be allowed to do anything with Langlands until they've helped the rest of us prove macaroni irrationality.
Why should I care about Euler’s macaroni
I just want to play with schemes
...
This is why we can't have nice things.
sorry, we need to tie this loose end of math
I can have nice things by not concerning myself with hard problems I don’t have the toolset to solve
I just deal with the stuff I like and have a nice time
I'm exactly the opposite.
Whenever I see something I don't have the toolset to understand, I get FOMO.
Lol I'm approaching Langlands more from the analysis pov
Oh?
This is a thing?
Kinda
Like I've been doing analysis of automorphic forms
What's your shtick mathematically?
I'm an oddball.
I do analysis, but not PDEs/Probability.
I like generating functions, complex analysis, integral transforms, harmonic analysis, and, lately, non-archimedean / p-adic analysis.
I've been obsessed with Collatz for the past five years.
And am finishing up my dissertation on it.
And I suck at algebra.
Interesting
Dissertation on Collatz? Or more generally on the analysis you've been doing?
(I ask because the order messages suggests Collatz but I've been under the impression that it's the kinda thing most people don't attempt until they already have a career going)
Come join voice chat if u want to help me make logic puzzle problems, not necessarily about math!
@burnt kettle don't spam
I guess so
is this a valid proof of the definite integral of cosx
i feel really happy rn i think i finally get how this works
first time actually (maybe even successfully) proving a definite integral rigorously after being stuck on this for like a week
have you covered FTC?
this seems needlessly complicated
not yet, my book covers integral first and it goes through it rigorously so i have to stick with these kinds of definitions
for now
?
I think the inequality you want to write here is for step functions not these series
seeing as the series aren't functions of x
uhh im not too sure but i was building it off a definition my textbook introduced and proved
which is this inequality
what i tried to do is use this definition
and this already proved inequality
oh yeah i should have mentioned
i forgot to mention "let P be a partition of [0,a] such that it is divided into n equal subintervals"
yeah, oh well i feel like im learning like real math
i would have gone
if i had to do it all this way from the start
might prepare me better for like harder subjects like LA

Sean, what year are you in?
i mean i had like 1 run through of calc from limits ot derivatives from stewart
im freshman hs
What is that
9th grade
idk man i have no life and i like math LMAO

Im speechless
i was struggling with geometry proofs in 9th grade 
Same, what's that topic that you've studied
That complex sheet with no numbers
its just calculus but done kinda in a kind of intro to analysis way
What country are you from
im in korea
That explains it all

but i lived a long time in australia
how so?
Oh wow same
nah im not really like those tryhard korean kids ik the types of ppl ur talking about
Asian people
i dont have like academies from the second school ends til 2 am
i mostly only self study except a physics tutor i go once a week
nah i like textbooks
So um :]... Can I have the download link :3
i always get distracted when watching yt videos or i just like zone out sometimes
I want to learn calc too at my own paste
sure, dm
though the textbook im using might not be that good for a beginner
its not the usual intro to calc
definitely not usual from what it seems like 
bruh 9th grader doing real analysis here

maybe I shouldn't have come back /s
people who unironically use sound indicators exist?
/s is almost a necessity sometimes, it's the only one worth using imo.
before i knew about that i thought they meant per second LOL
yeah you can't read tone and subtext over the internet
same lmao
I just kinda assume everyone is sarcastic
Hey 
/hj and /srs are useful
handjob??
oh eryc
Hello
half jerk
like when you're half joking
it's from reddit terminology ryc
since I see it in circlejerk subs
which makes it an affront to god
what's wrong with reddit terminology?

Reddit 
circejerk subs are the only good part of reddit
reddit > discord👀
is there mathcirclejerk
yes
get out
What is more important and fundamental: undecidability of the halting problem or Godel's incompleteness theorem?
These are the same picture
yeah they are both seminal works that are fundamentally similar results
you need to adapt either very slightly to be equivalent i think
halting problem has probably been cited more
I'm under the impression that incompleteness is noticeably harder than halting problem tbh
it took me a lot longer to learn the incompleteness theorems
i think that even though the ideas are similar, it's a bit harder to make the incompleteness theorem work properly
in terms of the proofs
Is the proof of incomplentess even hard
i wont deny that
My impression is that it's on the longer end
Or is it just that you need a lot of logic to formalize it
yes it is much harder than halting problem
The idea seems to basically be that if you have a system that can code arithmetic
you need to do a lot of work
Like I remember seeing a proof in set theory last year
Then you can assign these things called "Godel numbers" to statements
you could do a whole course on the incompleteness theorems pretty easily
and a large part would be studying the constructions
And it was basically just "this theorem can't be proven"
Oh wow you can't prove that true or false
But then you need a lot of background to formalize that
Yeah, the point being that you need the system to be able to express that statement
And I think that's where the Godel number idea kicks in
Godel numbering is not that complex of an idea though right
i thought the hardest part was after that
when you start pumping the recursive functions
i had a hard time with it at the time (like 3 years ago)
and the prof had to help me
It's just there are countably many formulas and countably many positive integers
So you can find a bijection
Worst Geometer: you don't wanna just define any bijection I feel
I feel like the content would then be nothing more than countability
You prob wanna find some mapping you can actually do things with
Do you
You're first off using the fact that your system contains Peano
And you want a way to prove that your "This theorem can't be proven" statement is actually expressible by the system
Anyway I know literally 0 logic and this is mostly hearsay so I'm not gonna talk out of my ass much here
I mean you can say "this theorem" with godel numbering

Exactly
the way you do this is pretty clever
and it makes the halting problem seem straightforward
You can find an explicit bijection between formulas and natural numbers
If you want to do this the dumb way write out a formula in your favorite text editor and take the file's binary
I don't give a shit what the function is
Just that it exists and can be computed
And then you can define a formula that checks if a proof is valid or not
Since every line of a proof is either an axiom (and you can tell if something is an axiom since your axioms are recursively enumerable) or follows from previous lines
idk maybe ultraproduct or obyaeg knows best
i just remember it being non-trivial at the time, i am sure it isnt so bad now
Sure, the key point is that you have some finite list of things and string them together to create symbols. All I'm saying is that the devil's gonna be in the details here
Is it?
https://web.yonsei.ac.kr/bkim/goedel.pdf here's a proof
Why do I give a shit about the details
.
lol
Don't try to get sassy lmfao
Writing down an explicit first order formula that returns true if a proof (written as an ordered list of Godel numbers) is valid seems like a nightmare




