Replying to @JasonRute @Almost_Sure
Perhaps poor phrasing on my part. I’m referring to the rate of convergence issue - while we have a formula which converges, we don’t know how quickly, so we cannot approximate the area to a desired precision.
Replying to @JohSch314
Completely unrealistic - who is exhausted by teaching just one linear algebra class? :P
Replying to @JasonRute @Almost_Sure
At first I was very annoyed that we don’t know this, but upon further reflection it makes perfect sense that it’s a problem of precision
Replying to @boazbaraktcs
I hear they’re gonna be huge nitter.gq/littmath/status/211525…
Replying to @beenwrekt @ilyaraz2
Evergreen
nitter.gq/littmath/status/205742…
Replying to @Noahpinion
I think your commentary on this stuff would be improved by learning something about what professional mathematicians do.
Maybe? I will have to check. This week I am very busy so I’m not a good choice if you want to push it out sooner rather than later 😅
Replying to @cobbaltt
That’s an argument that mathematical concepts are esoteric (which is true), not that eigenspaces are esoteric within the category of mathematical objects (which is false).
The sentence is unfortunately ambiguous. I’d’ve just cut the word
Replying to @AWice @Bayesprof
That was my instinct too - look for an invariant preserved by this operation
I just think a hundred years of mathematics (including work by those determined to find fault with ZFC!) should push one’s credence above 75%.
Replying to @littmath
This is such a good joke I’m mad I didn’t think of it
Replying to @aramh @ElliotGlazer
My point is the vast majority of mathematics can be formalized in ZFC, and that we’ve known this for a while. We get to breathe easy and work off vibes.
Conversely, if the vibes are ever rancid, that could translate to a problem in ZFC. But that hasn’t happened!
Replying to @ElliotGlazer
Even without all tools a modern logician can bring to bear on the question, 75% on Con(ZFC) seems insanely low for any working mathematician.
A one in four chance that in a hundred years of working in ZFC, no one’s spotted the problem? One in FOUR?
David J. Webb retweeted
A pessimistic hypothesis for complexity theory: every simple and beautiful algorithm can be made log(n)^epsilon faster by making it incredibly ugly
David J. Webb retweeted
An internal model at OpenAI has produced a claimed refutation of ETH! Russell Impagliazzo, Mohan Paturi, and I have been asked to help organize an open and independent examination of this claim. 1/4
David J. Webb retweeted
OpenAI claims that the Exponential Time Hypothesis is false, solving 3SAT (even counting the number of solutions) in 2^{o(n)} time, with a Lean formalization of the proof.
Announcement: openai.com/index/building-sc…
Paper: github.com/openai/math/blob/…
1/2
Replying to @Dumbass799 @denimneverdies
He seems (at least in this episode) to think that his life is not worth living if he is not Captain of the Enterprise. So my read was that his life (in the actual timeline) to that point was in pursuit of advancement until he settled into that role.
Replying to @Dumbass799 @denimneverdies
He wants to be captain of the flagship, I’d say that’s about comparable in ambition to admiralty
David J. Webb retweeted
TBF Lean’s rise had little to do with dependent types. Rather, its pleasant UX turned a few mathematicians into enthusiasts who built a library of mostly… classical math, which in turn spurred unprecedented adoption by stars like Terence Tao.











