bio | website | chemie.uni-hamburg.de/ac/AKs/… |
---|---|---|
location | Hamburg | |
age | 54 | |
visits | member for | 4 years, 1 month |
seen | 2 days ago | |
stats | profile views | 1,254 |
knot theory dilettant!
Jan 29 |
asked | “Prime” fusion rings |
Jan 2 |
comment |
Connection between Lie algebras and fusion rings
Don't worry, I don't know Jack :-) Could you give an actual example for a fusion rule not associated with a Lie algebra (remember, braided. At least)? |
Jan 1 |
asked | Connection between Lie algebras and fusion rings |
Dec 26 |
comment |
Longevity of “random” conjectures
Joseph - Indeed, a sufficient savvy computer program can generate conjectures faster than any mathematician can prove. (In fact I can do that, and I'm not sufficient savvy :-) Dag Oskar: And while I was writing the question, I thought: "This would be a theme for AMM or the Intelligencer". 1 year? Good grief, where's my memory :-) I'll look the article up. Again. Alexander: While this is a limited area (and possibly not representative - but who knows), have an uppie for your efforts. I was thinking of exactly such a progress report. |
Dec 26 |
accepted | Longevity of “random” conjectures |
Dec 25 |
awarded | Yearling |
Dec 25 |
asked | Longevity of “random” conjectures |
Dec 17 |
asked | “Generators” for fusion rings |
Dec 2 |
comment |
A 6j multiplicity paradox
Downloaded :-) I hope I can find the hole in my logic now myself, but still would appreciate a direct answer, although I checked the "answered" button. (Note added in reading: Argl, how do associtativity matrices relate to 6j symbols? In any case, Ax|xxx is 6-dimensional so this should mean my case A is true. Shrug.) |
Dec 2 |
accepted | A 6j multiplicity paradox |
Dec 1 |
asked | A 6j multiplicity paradox |
Dec 1 |
comment |
The resolution of which conjecture/problem would advance Mathematics the most?
What about specializing to applications? My life wouldn't change if the Riemann hypothesis is proven/disproven, and knowing P=/!=NP also not necessarily would have THAT impact with computers. |
Oct 22 |
comment |
Classification properties of fusion rings
(contd) Assume you do their construction, but no crossings are allowed in the cubic graph. I think you still can get an invariant, with "Elliott" 6j symbols. If someone could tell me the smallest self-dual, no multiplicity fusion ring that is NOT ribbon, I could try my Clebsch-O-Matic on it and settle the matter. (A try with AA=1,AB=B,B*B=1+A+2B suggests you are right but don't know whether I programmed multiplicity correctly.) |
Oct 22 |
comment |
Classification properties of fusion rings
@Turion: Thus "style" - I don't know enough on the field. |
Oct 21 |
asked | Classification properties of fusion rings |
Oct 9 |
accepted | No basis change in a fusion ring allowed? |
Oct 8 |
asked | No basis change in a fusion ring allowed? |
Jul 14 |
revised |
Non-semisimple Lie algebra tensors
Reduced it to the relevant. May go into details with new question. |
Jul 11 |
comment |
Non-semisimple Lie algebra tensors
Also: If you start with the tensor $C^i_{jk}$ and you can NOT invert $g_{lm}$ to get "the indices up", how do you arrive at $g^{no}$ at all? (I'm always working with matrix generators, thus my "complex conjugate transpose"). |
Jul 11 |
comment |
Non-semisimple Lie algebra tensors
I'm not at all familiar with Lie algebras, but obviously e.g. $C_{ijk}$ is identically zero for aff1 (because of dimension 2). Do you include this degenerate possibility in your statement? (Do such Lie algebras have a special name?) |