Reputation
2,350
Top tag
Next privilege 2,500 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
Badges
1 3 22
Newest
 Custodian
Impact
~31k people reached

Apr
5
comment Complexity of $\gcd$ algorithm
@BrianM.Scott Thank you very much.
Apr
4
comment Creating random numbers matching mean and standard deviation
For some reason, when reading the question I presumed he was asking for a normal distribution. I don't know why...
Mar
30
comment circle as polar coordinates
@snowman There is indeed no answer. In mathematics the method is usually problem-dependent. From my point of view, what I did is more straightforward, as I'm just calculating the integral, of course a lot of times you solve integrals by doing changes of variables that are not simple isometries such as a translation-rotation. You just have to look in each case which is the best method. In this particular case the integrand is just $r$ in polar coordinates, so trying to evaluate the area of integration in those coordinates seemed to be a better option.
Mar
30
comment circle as polar coordinates
@snowman What you do is equivalent to translating the circle (and the function) to the left so the circle is centered at the origin. That should give the same result. What I did was just evaluate the function in the area in which we're integrating.
Mar
30
comment circle as polar coordinates
@snowman I edited the answer with further details about that.
Mar
24
comment About this congruence implication
you mean when $X=0$?, then it's just Fermat's little theorem.
Mar
24
comment About this congruence implication
Thank you so much. The second one was unneccessary, but I was reading it in a paper and they said that that was an implication of both equations. Thank you again
Mar
12
comment Help visualizing this quotient space
I was seeing that cylinder, just wanted to be able to visualize that "wrapping and stretching" a little bit better.
Jun
27
comment Topologies on n-manifolds
Well... by definition of a manifold, any topology of a manifold must the same topology (o equivalent) to the usual topology, as it must be locally homeomorphic to $\mathbb R^n$ with the usual topology.
Jun
25
comment Geodesics of this metric
Ok, I see it. Thank you very much
Jun
25
comment Geodesics of this metric
Thank you. How do you get from $\ddot x-C^2 /x^3=0$ to the solution $x(t)$?
Jun
24
comment Let $G=\mathbb Z_4 \times \mathbb Z_2$. Find all $H$ subgroups of $G$ of order 2, so that $G / H$ is cyclic.
Oh that was your question... I'm sorry, well We already found all the subgroups of order $2$, now do you hav any problem in computing the quotient groups $G/H$ Checking if it' cyclic is checking if the identity $H$ generates the whole group $G/H$.
Jun
24
comment Help understanding a proof in differential geometry
I see your "firstly", I just don't see why it's neccesary in the argument. The fact that there are a finite number of points in which $df$ is singular comes from the expression of $P'$, right?
Jun
24
comment Help understanding a proof in differential geometry
Thank you both, it was a lot simpler than I thought.
Jun
19
comment How to prove a $k$-$1$ differential form is simple
Ok, I think I got it. Thank you.
Jun
19
comment How to prove a $k$-$1$ differential form is simple
I see that particular case, thank you. I was trying to relate the fact that 1 forms are obviously simple and that the space they span has the same dimension as the space of k-1 forms.
Jun
19
comment How to prove a $k$-$1$ differential form is simple
@ReneSchipperus I'm sorry, in your first comment, with both you were talking about the space of $k$-$1$ forms and what else?
Jun
19
comment How to prove a $k$-$1$ differential form is simple
@ReneSchipperus Hm? I see they must be a linear combination of the $k$ linearly independent $k$-$1$ forms, but I don't see it. I promise I've given it many thoughts. And the fact I've always seen it stated without proof makes me feel stupid xD
Jun
19
comment How to prove a $k$-$1$ differential form is simple
@ReneSchipperus Yes, but is that enough? I don't see it.
Jun
14
comment Book recommendations for someone interested in higher mathematics?
I first learnt group theory (only finite groups), then topology, and then more group theory (more about representation theory and continous groups). As for analysis, I've never learnt more than what a regular physicist studies, and I notice a lack of knowledge I would like to get rid off :)