bio | website | ryancreich.info |
---|---|---|
location | Los Angeles, CA | |
age | 31 | |
visits | member for | 4 years, 2 months |
seen | 1 hour ago | |
stats | profile views | 4,345 |
I am a postdoc at U Michigan (Ann Arbor). I was a graduate student at Harvard, where my advisor was Dennis Gaitsgory, and I graduated in the spring of 2011. In short, I do geometric representation theory, which in the case of my thesis means perverse sheaves on the affine grassmannian with some gerbes thrown in, but could also mean something much more elementary.
I'm also active on tex.stackexchange.com.
Aug 23 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Aug 23 |
answered | A question about “Zariski dense” arguments |
Jul 25 |
comment |
Cohomology group vs sheaf of cohomology group
This is probably the fanciest version of the "Law of universal linearity" that I've seen yet. |
Jul 19 |
comment |
Should all equations which appear in a thesis be numbered?
Doesn't this mean that the hidden numbers will cause gaps in the sequence of explicit numbers? |
Jul 2 |
awarded | Curious |
Jun 24 |
comment |
The functional equation $f(f(x))=x+f(x)^2$
The images in this answer are hosted on tinypic for now-obsolete historical reasons, and one of them has vanished. If you could, would you re-upload them using the Stack Exchange image tags? |
Jun 17 |
comment |
Is the following sum irrational?
Of course; I just meant that on its own the result was incomparable with Apery's. |
Jun 17 |
comment |
Is the following sum irrational?
Not exactly "stronger" (it could be 1, for instance). |
Jun 6 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Jun 4 |
awarded | Yearling |
May 27 |
awarded | Good Question |
May 15 |
answered | In this special situation, does $M \otimes B=0$ imply $M=0$? |
May 10 |
comment |
Non-continuous higher differentiability, II
Francois' comment reminds me of how, in topology, to define $n$-connected, you first require $k$-connected for all $k < n$. That is, a simply connected space must first be connected, and so on. Most likely whatever hopes you have for this shortcut to twice-differentiability will have this particular problem. |
May 6 |
comment |
Non-continuous higher differentiability
I sort of doubt this even implies that $f$ is differentiable except at $x$. For example, let $n = 1$, let $w(t)$ be your typical nowhere-differentiable continuous (i.e. Weierstrass) function, and let $f(t) = t^2 + t^3 w(t)$. Then this is "twice differentiable" according to you, but only at $t = 0$. |
May 4 |
comment |
The half-life of a theorem, or Arnold's principle at work
I can't say I'm surprised. The "physics" of the aether was motivated by electromagnetism, which is inherently a relativistic theory in which the number $c$ naturally appears. The concept of mass-energy (or -aether) equivalence seems plausible given the qualities of both that aether was supposed to possess. Finally, $E = mc^2$ is dimensionally correct (of course) and so getting something that looks like it from the above considerations seems to be not that hard. If so, this is not the only "classical" factor of 2 that Einstein fixed with relativity. |
Feb 23 |
comment |
Fibrations with isomorphic fibers, but not Zariski locally trivial
Oh, is that what the Brauer group is? |
Feb 12 |
comment |
Was lattice theory central to mid-20th century mathematics?
+1 for finding a connection between "lattices" and "lattices", not to mention all your other comments. |
Jan 6 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Jan 6 |
answered | Why we need to study representations of matrix groups? |
Jan 4 |
comment |
Geometric interpretation of the half-derivative?
I can't answer your question, but it reminds me of this one, in whose answer locality of the derivative is obtained from the Leibniz rule. |