theHigherGeometer

rimcræftiga |
bespoke constructions in categorified geometry since 2010 |
dude

Public Key

npub1p2q4c7sn2jgtj3w7g9syy5zjldxd8e5ruknf99g8y636ls8vx8esq5c0lr

NIP-05 Address

highergeometer_at_mathstodon.xyz@mostr.pub

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsq4q2u0gf4fy9egh0yzczz2pf0knxnu6p7tf5jj5rjdga0crkrruc4jsdlg

Author Public Key

npub1p2q4c7sn2jgtj3w7g9syy5zjldxd8e5ruknf99g8y636ls8vx8esq5c0lr

Show more details

Last Notes

2024-11-13 19:41:41

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-13/couple-encounter-koala-clambering-on-drawers-in-bedroom/104596694
#straya

2024-11-12 23:51:02

- reply

@npub1ch8…3ckt That's a really great idea. I struggle sometimes with finding the 'voice' of a paper, since much of my work is a blend of two different fields. The geometry is not so much of interest to category theorists, and the geometers are usually scared off by the category-heavy constructions. And, worse, many people in field are looking more at the abstraction and theory-building, rather than the bottom-up/computational-friendly approach that I prefer, which is inherited from physics (and is like the 'frog' view, to borrow another analogy).

2024-11-08 10:42:49

- reply

@npub16t6…hgu7 "We evaluated six leading language models on our existing subset of FrontierMath problems: o1-preview (OpenAI 2024b), o1-mini (OpenAI 2024d), and GPT-4o (2024-08-06 version) (OpenAI 2024a), Claude 3.5 Sonnet (2024-10-22 version) (Anthropic 2024b), Grok 2 Beta (XAI 2024), and Google DeepMind’s Gemini 1.5 Pro 002 (GoogleAI 2024). All models had a very low performance on FrontierMath problems, with no model achieving even a 2% success rate on the full benchmark"
he he he.

2024-11-07 07:03:32

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p The definition in those four lines (of a putative "action" of a group on a set) relied on a claim ("Recall that...") a bit further down that was just outright false. That's where the flippancy was.

2024-11-07 05:31:15

So far in this project I have used:
infinite-dimensional Lie groupoids
diffeological vector spaces as classifying spaces
bicategorical methods
formal anafunctors
differential form calculations
Hodge decomposition as a topological direct sum of TVSes
crossed modules
model categories
All to replace four flippant lines.

2024-11-01 02:49:43

- reply

@npub1c9m…9xjd Maybe like in Old English ?
https://oldenglish.info/advpronunciationguide.html
(you've got four choices, then..)

2024-10-23 00:02:19

https://johnhorgan.org/cross-check/the-horgan-surface-and-the-death-of-proof
I think I'll have to go read Horgan's 'The Death of Proof' now:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24941653

2024-10-11 02:59:46

Oh, this looks fun "A Categorical Approach to Forcing?"
https://www.saattrupdan.com/posts/2018-09-20-a-categorical-approach-to-forcing
"As a finishing comment we could ask if we gain anything by attempting to construct the “true” forcing category; i.e. a category consisting of cbas in which isomorphism in this category corresponds exactly to forcing equivalence. Since forcing equivalence is not the same as strong forcing equivalence there will be more isomorphisms in this category. But how can we construct such a category? One such way could be to somehow use Solovay’s characterisation of forcing equivalence to extract the weaker notion of a “forcing equivalence morphism” from this and then localise the category by these maps."
I'll have to come back to this to digest it...

2024-09-18 02:36:21

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p How much does one's weight drop up at peak flying altitude?

2024-09-13 00:41:28

I have a vague memory that @npub1knz…c73p once made a joke about rgs, which are, like rigs and rngs, are like rings with less assumptions about their structure, namely no (multiplicative) identity *or* negatives. I can't remember where...

2024-07-13 09:51:50

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p it's one thing to know it's wrong, but another to know how best to fix it! It's not the nLab, where the standards for edits are different.

2024-07-13 06:40:13

Wow, this is wrong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_geometry#Analytic_geometry
p-adic analytic geometry: am I a joke to you?

2024-07-12 13:41:39

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p I can wait for the book 🙂

2024-07-12 12:45:51

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p just comparing formula for the N-particles in a 3d box to the formula for a single particle in a 1d box I can see how N-->1, V-->L, 3/2-->1/2..... but also 5/2-->1/2?? That certainly is mysterious!

2024-06-20 22:29:08

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p yes, it's an entirely predictable reaction by the ex-President, he really would take such a result seriously.

2024-06-17 05:08:30

Prime example of Goodhart's Law
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/06/12/how-a-widely-used-ranking-system-ended-up-with-three-fake-journals-in-its-top-10-philosophy-list/

2024-05-31 05:23:58

- reply

@npub1kce…nezs Interesting, tell me more

2024-05-31 00:45:10

Steve Vckers speaking at the Topos Institute: the real line is not a set 😏
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6LPEFteLts
https://media.mathstodon.xyz/media_attachments/files/112/532/931/080/787/156/original/cf2416825c29e26d.png

2024-05-25 11:37:09

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p no, but I knew where to look for it, so that's the next best thing, right?

2024-05-20 02:38:02

What do you think
"endorsement and initial testing of an AI incubator to enable our transition"
means, in the context of the merger of a pair of universities, and in particular a document talking about curriculum development?

2024-05-19 12:23:04

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p Gosh, I thought AI could do anything!
\({}_{/s}\)

2024-05-19 03:23:28

- reply

@npub1knz…c73p if there's any good use for ai-generated images, it's asking such a piece of software to make a blend of Heaviside and Wolverine, just for laughs.

2024-05-13 06:36:38

Spotted in the wild:
"We understand that a career change is a big decision. This role may even have you considering a move to Adelaide to embark on your next career chapter?"
What's the question?

2023-09-30 10:31:45

Just got back a "quick" opinion on our article that took three months. The results were apparently too pedestrian, the result unsurprising and we went into too much detail.
The whole point was to recast an existing construction using low-tech tools and show how far one could get. And given the elementary technique, we went into details so it was possible to actually referee the calculations, given that multiple papers in this area have had mistakes due to technicalities being unchecked by referees...