Skip to main content
20 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 23, 2023 at 11:08 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 1 character in body
Nov 23, 2023 at 10:58 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 5 characters in body
Nov 23, 2023 at 6:48 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 67 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 13:22 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 131 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 13:11 comment added Anixx @JamesPropp a periodic lattice in -1-dimension is both a ball and a a cube. That's why I confined my answer to the dimension -1 only. If we take the dimension -2, the square lattice would be a cube, but not a sphere, and I cannot tell how a ball in this dimension should look like
Oct 10, 2020 at 12:57 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 17 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 12:48 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 17 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 12:42 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 21 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 2:47 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 18 characters in body
Oct 10, 2020 at 1:21 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 13 characters in body
Apr 19, 2020 at 22:06 comment added Anixx @JamesPropp also, take a look at this: tglad.blogspot.com/2017/08/…
Apr 19, 2020 at 17:25 comment added Anixx @JamesPropp And, in general, when we are talking about negative dimensions, the bodies in them are littices, spectrums and other (infinite but countable) collections of dots, but their volumes are determined based on their overall density (or the infinite part of numerocity if you prefer), not on the number of dots they include.
Apr 19, 2020 at 17:10 comment added Anixx @JamesPropp This answer is specifically about the dimension -1, and the generalization to other dimensions may require efforts. Particularly, because in dimension -1 the periodic lattice is both a sphere and a cube.
Apr 19, 2020 at 17:03 comment added James Propp I do not see why “the unit sphere is a pi-periodic lattice” (and I doubt that it is a “known fact”). Also, Anixx’s style of answer is unlikely to discriminate between even and odd (negative) dimensionalities, so I think it’s on the wrong track.
Apr 19, 2020 at 16:34 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 19 characters in body
Apr 19, 2020 at 16:33 comment added Anixx @JamesPropp oh yes, i missed a mistake
Apr 19, 2020 at 16:31 comment added James Propp This proposed value of the “volume” of the (-1)-ball does not agree with the formula given in the original post.
Apr 18, 2020 at 3:58 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 51 characters in body
Apr 18, 2020 at 3:48 history edited Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0
added 62 characters in body
Apr 18, 2020 at 3:32 history answered Anixx CC BY-SA 4.0