To give slightly more context, it was Exercise 3.3 from this[1] paper by Hutchings and Taubes

PSA: check your quantifiers.

I've just realised that I spent several hours attempting to prove, ∀ v, ∀ u, (u = v) ⇔ f(u) = f(v) (v, u and f are all specific things but it's the shape of the problem that's important).

I should have been proving ∀ v, (∃ u, u = v) ⇔ (∃ u, f(u) = f(v)) (which is, at least, possible).

quantum boosted

The pseudorhomicuboctahedron can never be an Archimedean solid.
Boost if you agree

The Hodge decomposition (in particular the fact that every de Rham cohom. class has a harmonic representative) probably doesn't extend to pseudo-Riemannian mflds. because the pR Laplacian isn't elliptic.

Is there a weaker result that does extend to pR mflds. or some sort of pR variant of Hodge theory?

quantum boosted

I will go kicking and screaming into category theory

quantum boosted

What's your primary OS?

Boosts appreciated for sample size :)

quantum boosted

People in 2021 pining for Google Reader feels like standing next to a clean mountain spring and wishing you had an old Dasani bottle.

So I'm reasonably sure it's $$\mathbf{Z}^{\ast n}$$, I'm just having trouble figuring out how to Seifert-Van Kampen it together,

quantum boosted

rabid tech vent

why the bloody damned fucked fuckety fuck the tabs need to all reload every time I switch to another app with this so called web browser for Android?

can someone fucking invent multitasking for fucks sake? can we get to 1960 I fucking beg you it's not too much to fucking ask is it??

I guess this is a problem for the morning

Five minutes of work have determined that this is too tedious a problem to solve tonight

> me: About to sleep
> brain: What is $$\pi_1(X_n)$$ where $$X_n$$ is the complement of the $$n$$-fold wedge product of $$S^1$$ with itself in $$\mathbf{R}^3$$?
> me (tired): _Why?_

quantum boosted

> We explore the ability for the CPU to “double speculate”, where a second stalled indirect jump while the CPU is already speculating causes it to predict the target and speculate a second time.

> [..] It appears Haswell chips do not speculate while already speculating [...] Both Sandy Bridge (which preceded Haswell) and Kaby Lake (which followed Haswell) support nested speculation. We find that when a CPU does support nested speculation, there appears to be no limit to nested depth besides the speculative instruction limit.

We heard you like speculative execution. So we put speculative execution in your speculative execution so you can do speculative execution when you do speculative execution. ​​​​

quantum boosted

Does anyone know a good book to explain gender stuff to a boomer with relatively no background but an interest in learning?

quantum boosted

and then god created enbies and he was like "oh shit thats tight these people are actually in my image, way moreso than male and female"
- genesis 1:27.5

quantum boosted

the safest way to use computers is still abstinence

quantum boosted
quantum boosted

Here's a question: is it OK to omit parentheses around the argument to a non-standard function?

Like, "sin x = sin(x)" and "log z = log(z)" are common, but what about "f x = f(x)"?

Does the function name need to be more than one letter?

"flop x = flop(x)"

quantum boosted

@jordyd category theorists will literally reverse an arrow instead of going to therapy

Show older

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!