bio  website  math.princeton.edu/directory/… 

location  Princeton, New Jersey  
age  26  
visits  member for  4 years, 5 months 
seen  17 hours ago  
stats  profile views  1,984 
PhD student at Princeton University
1d

reviewed  Approve suggested edit on $K$homology of $BG$ 
Jul 12 
reviewed  Approve suggested edit on Incomplete Kloosterman sum 
Jul 9 
awarded  Popular Question 
Jun 28 
revised 
Dedekind Zeta function: behaviour at 1
fixed link 
Jun 26 
reviewed  Approve suggested edit on How do you show that $S^{\infty}$ is contractible? 
Jun 18 
reviewed  Reject suggested edit on nontrivial theorems with trivial proofs 
Jun 4 
awarded  Nice Question 
May 28 
awarded  Custodian 
May 28 
reviewed  Approve suggested edit on The prime numbers modulo $k$, are not periodic 
May 25 
awarded  Enlightened 
May 25 
awarded  Nice Answer 
Apr 24 
comment 
Petersson product of newforms to different level
What do you mean by the Petersson inner product? By definition it should be of the form $\langle f,g\rangle = \frac{1}{[\Gamma_0(1) : \Gamma_0(N)]}\int_{\Gamma_0(N) \backslash \mathbb{H}}f(z)\overline{g(z)} y^k \, \frac{dx\, dy}{y^2}$, and in particular depends on $N$ (and $k$). So it only makes sense to take the inner product of two modular forms of the same weight and level. 
Apr 22 
answered  Prime races à la Mertens 
Apr 10 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
Again, this does not answer the question as it deals only with the case of linear independence (and also it is about the discrete form of the KroneckerWeyl theorem, not the continuous form). 
Apr 9 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
@GregMartin  done! 
Apr 9 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
Oh, I think I get it; you mean a base change such that $\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_r$ are linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$ and $\theta_{r+1},\ldots,\theta_n = 0$. But this base change is essentially equivalent to part (1) of the theorem in my answer, and then at the end for part (2) you're going to need to apply the inverse of this base change to get the result. 
Apr 9 
answered  Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality 
Apr 9 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
Asaf, did you check my reference? Witte Morris' book discusses the KroneckerWeyl theorem directly in the first three sections of the first chapter (as a motivating case of Ratner's theorems), which is what Greg Martin was asking about. I didn't say that Witte Morris' book actually gave the complete proof of Ratner's theorems. In any case, the proof of the KroneckerWeyl theorem is really a theorem of abelian Fourier analysis, so even the nilpotent case of Ratner's theorems is overkill. 
Apr 9 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
For Ratner's theorem, you could use this as a reference: people.uleth.ca/~dave.morris/books/Ratner.pdf. It covers the basic case of $G/\Gamma = \mathbb{R}^d/\mathbb{Z}^d$ in the beginning of the first chapter, but unfortunately it leaves the proofs as exercises, namely Exercises 1.1.2, 1.1.5, and 1.3.4. 
Apr 9 
comment 
Reference for KroneckerWeyl theorem in full generality
This is incorrect; the theorem depends on the linear relations between the $\theta_j$, because this defines the subtorus! 