ginnungagap

16 ms·

151.
Possible progress on the Hadwiger-Nelson problem (chromatic number of the plane)(plus.google.com)
1 points by ginnungagap 9y ago|1 comments
152.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
For the Langlands program he was awarded the Abel prize just a few weeks ago, following the link "Read more about Robert P. Langlands" at the end of the official page [1] for the Abel prize you can read a short and informal explan
153.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
From the introduction to Shelah's Classification Theory and the number of nonisomorphic models (an extremely technical book with 700+ pages): So we shall now explain how to read the book. The right way is to put it on your des
154.
Why We Should Stop Grading Students on a Curve (2016)(nytimes.com)
2 points by ginnungagap 9y ago|0 comments
155.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
The simplified version is that if buy 1500 tickets one of those will win you 1000$ and 1500/54=27 tickets will win 50$ each for a total of 2350$
156.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
Group theory originated in a very visual and geometric ways studying the symmetries of various objects, before the modern definition of group was given. Many groups studied today are still geometrical in nature: the dihedral groups are the
157.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
Sure, but ZFC by itself also deals with every interesting set, I was just being nitpicky of my own assertion. I'm not familiar with TG, what's the relation between it and ZFC+some large cardinal axiom?
158.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
Every mathematical object (ok, this is false but that's not the point here) can be constructed in ZFC (the standard axiomatic framework for set theory) so you can construct the real numbers in terms of sets (if you want more precise in
159.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
That also has a formal mathematical interpetation as a distribution rather than a function now and the theory of distributions found many applications in PDEs. An interesting thing is that before Dirac, Green was already informally using di
160.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
What they are called might not be the point, but calling them prime in a context in which prime has a precise meaning while they are not can be confusing. Especially since the difference between prime and irreducible is subtle and it's
161.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
Wikipedia isn't a good source, but it uses 3 as an element of Z[√-5] as an example so it's quite relevant: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_element For a more serious reference any abstract algebra
162.
by ginnungagap 9y ago
All four of those factors are prime in the new number ring, giving 6 a dual existence Those factors are irreducibles, but they aren't primes, which is the reason why the uniqueness of factorization fails. A nonzero non unit element