198 reputation
110
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 7 months
seen 2 days ago

Dec
30
asked limit inferior and subsequence
Dec
26
awarded  Supporter
Dec
26
comment Why is $\log(\sqrt{x^2+1}+x)$ odd?
that's why I love math
Oct
20
awarded  Critic
Oct
20
comment Does Pi contain all possible number combinations?
why would you care, really... there are so many interesting problems, why this one..
Oct
20
asked Definition by commutation property on structures : continuity and where?
Jul
1
comment Relation between Cholesky and SVD
doesn't your first point stand as well if we assume A only semi positive definite ?
Jul
1
comment Relation between Cholesky and SVD
I guess if you already computed it somewhere, it makes a lot of sense.
Mar
24
comment Pseudo Proofs that are intuitively reasonable
The notion of "unrigorous" here is : there exists a functor which makes the statement true, although we are not going to explicit it. I don't think this example falls into this notion.
Mar
24
comment Pseudo Proofs that are intuitively reasonable
Most of the time those proof are rigorous, because there exists a functor that gives sense to the notation. Cf Dirac or physicist "unrigorous" notation that works very well.... because it is rigorous although it does not seem like it.
Mar
11
asked A digital notebook for Mathematics?
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@joriki in the presence of a term, whatever it is, increasing or else, the only consistent way is to assume the weakest form. If I tell you I have a "licence", you should not assume I have a doctor's licence, nor a driving's licence, and you should fear I am james bond. nothing personal, just logic.
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@joriki except that it is a matter of logic. the fact that you dont recognize it as such just underline the extent of the damages done.
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@Patrick I am horrified to hear that. that an ambiguous word might might refers to something other than the weakest form, unless otherwise specified, is just not logical.
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@GEdgar and this is insane. that's not a consistent way to deal with ambiguity. The only consistent way to deal with ambiguity is to assume that the reality described by it is the weakest form. This is logic 101.
Mar
4
awarded  Scholar
Mar
4
accepted why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
As a side question, is it a modern convention, or something from before ? What concerns me the most is younger people learning that. Weak minds will just be confused and drop off learning stuff. Those those with common sense will rightfully think that their teacher are a joke.
Mar
4
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@steve Using only "strictly increasing" and "weakly increasing" will be my personal rule to avoid spreading the disease. The convention that, unless specified otherwise, increasing, or any other word, do relate to weakest definition compatible with the said word seems only plain sound logic to me. If we allow ourselves to say that a word implies something other than the weakest concept compatible with it, then chaos ensues, as each person will claim it should be assumed that his own "stronger" version of the concept should holds implicitely.
Mar
3
comment why do we use 'non-increasing' instead of decreasing?
@Pierre-YvesGaillard I would not un-hold it against you