Skip to main content
Todd Trimble's user avatar
Todd Trimble's user avatar
Todd Trimble's user avatar
Todd Trimble
  • Member for 15 years, 2 months
  • Last seen this week
comment
Group which "resembles" the free product of a cyclic group of order two and a cyclic group of order three, but isn't.
Qiaochu: I haven't thought hard about it. Everyone: it's not that the existence of such things is particularly in question (I fully believe it). But all the examples I've been provided with are handwavy. What I want is a very explicit example, and hopefully a reference.
comment
Group which "resembles" the free product of a cyclic group of order two and a cyclic group of order three, but isn't.
Thanks, Richard; that seems very reasonable. I'll see whether I can get hold of that reference.
comment
Group which "resembles" the free product of a cyclic group of order two and a cyclic group of order three, but isn't.
That's very interesting Mark (and thank you), but an explicit example would be very nice. Explicit geometric examples would be most welcome!
Loading…
comment
explicit diffeomorphim between open simplex and open ball
My thanks to those who answered Jim Stasheff's question. It arose in a discussion over at the nLab (and of course we're interested in the generalization to star-shaped open domains, addressed by Dan Ramras and Robin Chapman below).
answered
Loading…
Loading…
awarded
comment
Gossip about Grothendieck and distributive lattices
You're welcome, Pete -- I was puzzled too, not knowing what Rota could have meant by "necessary and sufficient conditions" for CRT, since as you had pointed out, the more familiar version of CRT is a very simple and general thing. So I googled it, and this was one of the results. But I'm still puzzled as to why Rota seems to think that this result is something Grothendieck would have especially benefited from, or whether there's more to the story that he's not telling us.
awarded
comment
How do I explain the number e to a ten year old?
You're right, Sadeq, that I didn't notice that condition. However, the statement is still incorrect if $a, b > 1$ are arbitrary numbers (take $a = 5$ and $b = 1.001$). Or, better yet, take $a = 4$, $b = 2$.
awarded
comment
How do I explain the number e to a ten year old?
I don't know if my suggestion would actually "work"; I suspect it would work only if the child rather enjoys mathematics. But it could be fun to talk about logarithmic spirals (they are beautiful and occur in nature). I also remember some nice related visuals from Donald Duck in MathMagic Land.
comment
How do I explain the number e to a ten year old?
I was not aware of that, J.M. -- thanks!
answered
Loading…
comment
How do I explain the number e to a ten year old?
Sadeq, your penultimate statement is wrong: consider $a = 5$ and $b = 1$. In your final sentence, you either need to replace $>$ by $\geq$ or specify that $x \neq e$.
Loading…
comment
Categories First Or Categories Last In Basic Algebra?
Thanks for a fresh and flavorful answer, Andrew! And one that helps restore dignity to those who choose category theory as a focus of research.
awarded
awarded
1
302 303
304
305 306
313