127 reputation
7
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 1 month
seen Dec 8 at 18:27

Jul
2
awarded  Curious
Jun
9
accepted Real part of integral over holomorphic 1-form is zero implies the one-form is zero
Jun
9
asked Real part of integral over holomorphic 1-form is zero implies the one-form is zero
Jun
7
awarded  Critic
Jun
3
comment Almost complex structure compatible with Levi-Civita connection of immersed submanifold?
Ah, of course, that makes sense, $\nabla$ would not be defined on $(T_pM)^\perp$. However, $\nabla_X Y \in TM$ so $\langle \nabla_XY,JZ\rangle = 0$, exactly because $\nabla_XY$ lies in $TM$, I think? Then that should in fact be enough to prove the theorem I want, with the added condition that $M$ is totally real.
Jun
3
comment Almost complex structure compatible with Levi-Civita connection of immersed submanifold?
I'm quite a beginner in Riemannian Geometry, so I hope you don't mind any stupid questions, but... does TM have to be J-invariant for this question to make sense? The particular case I really need (though I'm interested in the more general statement) is if $M$ is totally real, minimal and of constant seciontal curvature, and $\tilde{M}$ is a complex space form, then $\langle Jh(X,Y),Z \rangle = \langle Jh(X,Z),Y\rangle$ with $h$ the second fundamental form of the immersion. What I stated in the question is (according to my calculations) sufficient to prove this.
Jun
3
asked Almost complex structure compatible with Levi-Civita connection of immersed submanifold?
May
29
comment Two doors, 2 guards logic problem (“is XOR a hypothetical statement?”)
I see, thank you for the clarification... The "A or B, but if A, ..." is exactly what made me doubt whether XOR was allowed or not. I'm toying with the idea of rephrasing the question by "Is exactly one of the following statements true: '...' and '...'?" which should highlight the non-hypothetical nature of the question?
May
29
accepted Two doors, 2 guards logic problem (“is XOR a hypothetical statement?”)
May
29
asked Two doors, 2 guards logic problem (“is XOR a hypothetical statement?”)
Oct
21
awarded  Commentator
Oct
21
comment Condition so that coefficients nilpotent implies power series nilpotent for non-noetherian ring $R$ with char$(R) = 0$
Sorry, I should've specified that I was looking for a necessary and sufficient condition - I'm looking to describe "what the nilpotent elements of R[[X]] look like", so to speak. Theorem 2 gives a sufficient but not necessary condition, and I believe Corollary 1 does too (where the sufficient but not necessary part is that $A_f$ has to be finitely generated).
Oct
21
revised Condition so that coefficients nilpotent implies power series nilpotent for non-noetherian ring $R$ with char$(R) = 0$
added 94 characters in body
Oct
20
comment Condition so that coefficients nilpotent implies power series nilpotent for non-noetherian ring $R$ with char$(R) = 0$
@MartinBrandenburg I had already read the first one, which confirmed the things I mentioned in my post but didn't answer the question. I've just read the second one, but again it only confirms my post (unless I misread something).
Oct
20
asked Condition so that coefficients nilpotent implies power series nilpotent for non-noetherian ring $R$ with char$(R) = 0$
Oct
18
accepted Nilradical of $\mathbb{R}[X,Y]/(X^nY^m)$
Oct
10
asked Nilradical of $\mathbb{R}[X,Y]/(X^nY^m)$
May
25
accepted Summation with factorial terms (involving Laguerre polynomials)
May
25
comment Summation with factorial terms (involving Laguerre polynomials)
Thanks! I used the same reasoning with the poles of the gamma, but turned it into a summation rather than changing the order of integration.
May
25
comment Summation with factorial terms (involving Laguerre polynomials)
Perhaps I should've mentioned this, but Laguerre polynomials aren't actually part of my course and this exercise is where they were first introduced, so I would not be allowed to use this property without proving it first. Would it be wise to prove this property or to continue looking for a more direct solution?