Timeline for SHPS and SPHS inequality using monounary algebra
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2014 at 20:06 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | @Arturo, apologies for the misrepresentation. Hopefully your reasons for degree of participation are cleaner than mine. I am glad to see your writing on MathOverflow. I hope I am not wrong in my estimation of universal algebraic knowledge of the present math.SE participants. Gerhard "Will Use A Different Tense" Paseman, 2014.04.17 | |
| Apr 17, 2014 at 19:58 | comment | added | Arturo Magidin | @GerhardPaseman: Slight correction: I am not currently participating in math.SE, and have not for quite a while. | |
| Apr 17, 2014 at 18:09 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | Arturo and many others familiar with this level of universal algebra often participate on math.stackexchange. If you @anurag decide to ask similar questions on MathOverflow, I recommend prefacing with a little background, e.g. "I'm a third year undergraduate with a little linear algebra background trying to go through paper X, and teaching myself universal algebra out of text Z. How do I approach Y?" It will then be clear that you aren't a graduate student asking others to do your work, and you will be redirected more gently. Gerhard "With Less Downvotes As Well" Paseman, 2014.04.17 | |
| Apr 17, 2014 at 18:03 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | It is more a matter of exposition. Now that I have reread it, I find less problem with it. If I were concluding with A and explaining it, I might go a little more slowly, or indicate with more clarity how to produce A_4 union A_1. My initial (mild) objection stemmed from the impression that you were taking a homomorphic image of a subalgebra of A: you aren't, but it is easy for me to get the wrong impression, and I have seen this material before. I can't think of a good way to improve the exposition though. Gerhard "Not To Mention Other Students" Paseman, 2014.04.17 | |
| Apr 16, 2014 at 18:26 | comment | added | Alvis | @Arturo Thanks. I hope I will be spared of negative votes down there. I went to your profile and found out that your advisor was Prof Bergman. I was reading one of his paper on SHPS and HSP inequality.The one where he uses groups of transalation and rotations to prove the inequality. Would you like to have some discussion on that ? Although I must warn you that some of my reasonings/doubts may sound silly coz m still an undergraduate student reading some advanced math. | |
| Apr 16, 2014 at 14:42 | vote | accept | Alvis | ||
| Apr 16, 2014 at 5:56 | history | edited | Arturo Magidin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed arithmetical error by replacing argument somewhat.
|
| Apr 16, 2014 at 5:56 | comment | added | Arturo Magidin | There was an arithmetical error following the sentence you ask about; I've fixed the argument. | |
| Apr 16, 2014 at 5:36 | comment | added | Arturo Magidin | 1. $\Phi$ is a congruence, hence it is both a subalgebra of $A_p\times A_p$, and an equivalence relation; if $(p-k+2,1)\in\Phi$, and $(1,k)\in\Phi$, then we must have $(k,p-k+2)\in\Phi$ by symmetry and transitivity. I applied $f$ to get $(p-k+2,1)$. 2. I showed how: mod out by the congruence $\Phi$ defined in the last paragraph. | |
| Apr 16, 2014 at 3:57 | comment | added | Alvis | I have two issues on this. 1. Which operation did you use here "we obtain the pair $(p-k+2,1)\in \Phi$, and so we must have $(k,p-k+2)\in \Phi$" 2. How do you show $A=\prod A_p$ has homomorphic image as disjoint union of $A_4$ and $A_1$ | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 21:46 | comment | added | Arturo Magidin | @Gerhard: Fair enough on your final comment; but I'm not sure I understand the first part. | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 20:52 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | You should claim a subhom of A is isomorphic to A_4 union A_1. (Although I think I see that the union is also in H(A).) Also, I suspect this question and answer more appropriate for math.se, in my humble opinion. Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2014.04.15 | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 20:45 | history | answered | Arturo Magidin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |