Timeline for Uniformizing the surcomplex unit circle
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2012 at 8:22 | vote | accept | James Propp | ||
| Mar 19, 2012 at 20:30 | history | edited | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 395 characters in body
|
| Mar 19, 2012 at 20:20 | history | edited | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1352 characters in body
|
| Mar 19, 2012 at 19:56 | comment | added | Gerald Edgar | I don't even know what bracket-based definitions of sin and cos are. In ONAG Conway only remarks that the obvious ones don't work. | |
| Mar 19, 2012 at 18:11 | comment | added | James Propp | Thanks for the remark about the choice of "complementary subgroup"; it clarified things for me. But I still don't see the surjectivity of the map from the surreals to the surcomplex unit circle. I agree that in non-standard analysis there's a transfer principle, but surreal analysis is different from NSA (I'll start a new thread on this: mathoverflow.net/questions/91646/…), and in any case it's not clear to me that bracket-based definitions of sin and cos are first-order. | |
| Mar 18, 2012 at 16:57 | history | edited | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 222 characters in body; added 1 characters in body; added 1 characters in body; deleted 1 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2012 at 16:52 | history | edited | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 825 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2012 at 2:47 | comment | added | James Propp | How do we know the map is surjective? | |
| Mar 16, 2012 at 13:50 | history | answered | Gerald Edgar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |