2,349 reputation
635
bio website
location Calgary, Canada
age 20
visits member for 2 years, 5 months
seen 21 hours ago

I am currently attending the University of Calgary for an Honours Pure Mathematics degree.


Apr
11
awarded  Popular Question
Apr
4
comment Number of touching triplets in hypersphere packing contact graph
You may be interested in a paper I wrote regarding touching triplets in contact graphs: arxiv.org/abs/1210.5756.
Apr
2
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
11
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Is my proof correct? Subsequence of $x_n$ converging to $\inf_n \sup_k\{x_k : k \ge n\}$
Feb
24
comment Hard problems book in linear algebra
Hoffman and Kunze have pretty hard questions in the later chapters. Depends on what level of linear algebra you are interested in.
Feb
22
comment Probability of Relatively Prime Integers
@AndréNicolas: I see. So, I will re-write the paper with the use of asymptotic density and a limit and then re-submit the paper. Thank you so much for your help!
Feb
22
comment Probability of Relatively Prime Integers
@AndréNicolas: Thank you so much for the clarification! So, if I were to replace the word probability with asymptotic density and have an intermediary step with a limit, then the proof is correct? In the statement of the theorem can I use the word "probability" as in the Johnson and Collins paper (link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F3-540-51084-2_23)? Or must we state the theorems with "asymptotic density" instead? I think that my argument is the same, but that I have been misusing the terminology. If so, you can add that answer and I will accept it!
Feb
21
comment Probability of Relatively Prime Integers
@AndréNicolas: The probability 1/p is calculated, and is to be understood as, the limit when Nā†’āˆž from the "probability of randomly selecting a prime p in the natural numbers 1 to N". That is, we assign only a probability measure on the first N numbers, find the probability, and then extend it. Does that work?
Feb
21
comment Probability of Relatively Prime Integers
@AndréNicolas: What is the necessity of the asymptotic density argument? If you are referring to, say Theorem 332 of Hardy and Wright (which proves $P(\text{gcd}(x,y)=1)=\frac{1}{\zeta(2)}$ using the Mobius function, inclusion-exclusion, and Big O notation on special numbers), then this is not an answer to my question. I realize you can give a proof that way, and Johnson and Collins gave a similar style proof for the case of the Gaussian integers. My question is what the problem is with my above proof over the integers (as my Gaussian integer proof is of a similar style)?
Feb
21
asked Probability of Relatively Prime Integers
Feb
1
awarded  Custodian
Feb
1
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Polynomial best fit line for very large values
Jan
28
awarded  Popular Question
Jan
16
accepted Prime ideal decomposition in quadratic field extensions
Jan
16
comment Prime ideal decomposition in quadratic field extensions
That's a remarkably elegant answer which also helps me understand some related topics; even a year after my initial understanding of the question.
Dec
25
comment Peano arithmetic with the second-order induction axiom
@AndresCaicedo: Thanks for the additional comments! I knew my answer was very incomplete.
Dec
24
answered Peano arithmetic with the second-order induction axiom
Dec
24
answered Factorization of L-functions
Nov
26
awarded  Popular Question
Nov
25
comment How to Show that the sum of two Poisson Random Variables is a Poisson Random Variable
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)