13,009 reputation
238102
bio website people.brandeis.edu/~jbellaic
location Stony Creek, États-Unis
age
visits member for 4 years, 1 month
seen 33 mins ago

Professor of Mathematics at Brandeis University


1h
comment Arthur's refinement of parameters for unitary automorphic representations
Something to say, certainly, but I don't know exactly what. At first glance, local A-packets are much less well behaved than local L-packets. For instance they are not necessary disjoint (that is a representation may belong to several different local A-packets) and there is no clear specification in Arthur conjecture what part of the admissible dual is covered by the union of all local A-packets, except that the representations that are local components of discrete automorphic representations should belong to at least one A-packet.
5h
awarded  Revival
12h
answered Arthur's refinement of parameters for unitary automorphic representations
Oct
6
comment Why do roots of polynomials tend to have absolute value close to 1?
I'm sorry, but with all due respect for the other contributions to this site of the OP and most answerers , this is definitely not a great question. It is not precise, does not admit any definitive answer, and is kind of trivial: Henry's comment already demystifies it completely, and Joseph Van Name shows that it's juts a very simple exercise in complex analysis. Yet another example of the stack exchange system gone crazy.
Oct
4
comment Has philosophy ever clarified mathematics?
... understand the same rules in the same way? What I mean is that Wittgenstein puts into question not only the feasibility of Hilbert's finitist program of fundations in mathematics (as Gödel's theorem) does, but the very meaning of such a program.
Oct
4
comment Has philosophy ever clarified mathematics?
I don't think I agree with the interpretation of Wittgenstein's argument as having to do with undecidability. Wittgenstein' criticism is more fundamental (and perhaps therefore less interesting from a mathematical point of view): take some proposition perfectly decidable, with a complete and valid proof in a given systems of axioms. What do you do if someone tells you: "I understand the system of axioms, but I don't think this proof proves the proposition according to the rules we agreed on". Well, surely he must have misunderstand these rules, but how do we ensure that he and me...
Oct
4
revised About the Dimension of a complete local ring
texified the text.
Oct
1
comment Has philosophy ever clarified mathematics?
I agree with Waldemar. Berkeley did not influence Weierstrass directly, but he put in the minds of all mathematicians the idea that there was a foundational problem in the work of Newton and Leibniz. Without him, most lesser mathematicians (that is, almost all) would have wrongly believed that whatever difficulties they might have with foundations of calculus were due to their own limitations. Berkeley spurred a desire for laying down strong foundations for calculus for generations of mathematicians, and many tried with no or only partial success before the final push of Bolzano & Weierstrass
Sep
30
awarded  Explainer
Sep
30
awarded  Popular Question
Sep
27
revised Holomorphic cusp forms and cohomology of GL(2,Z)
added 11 characters in body
Sep
27
answered Holomorphic cusp forms and cohomology of GL(2,Z)
Sep
26
reviewed Leave Open Irreducible action of an algebraic group
Sep
25
comment Galois groups and prescribed ramification
Pablo: I don't know.
Sep
25
revised Galois groups and prescribed ramification
added 310 characters in body
Sep
24
awarded  Enlightened
Sep
24
awarded  Autobiographer
Sep
24
awarded  Nice Answer
Sep
24
answered Galois groups and prescribed ramification
Sep
24
awarded  Electorate