Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 25 at 6:49 vote accept joro
Jan 18 at 17:25 comment added Peter Taylor Incidentally the "injective" and "such that their images are disjoint", which capture the original definition of $W$ as a "subset of $K$", are unused and unnecessary in this case. If $i \neq j$ then clearly $w(i) \neq w(j)$ and $w(i) \neq \overline{w}(j)$ since otherwise respectively $w(i) \overline{w}(j)$ or $w(i)w(j)$ would be zero, violating the condition. We can weaken to $w(i) \neq \overline{w}(i)$ (in the original formulation, $W[i] \neq W[i+k]$), but that constraint is then only relevant if there are non-zero square roots of zero in $K$.
Jan 18 at 10:29 comment added Peter Taylor @joro, I don't understand the question, but it's possible that the edit I just completed already answers it.
Jan 18 at 10:29 history edited Peter Taylor CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 338 characters in body
Jan 18 at 10:20 comment added joro Thanks. I suppose you can't verify candidate solution without enumerating the subsets, right?
Jan 17 at 16:26 history answered Peter Taylor CC BY-SA 4.0