And another

So it's... well, it's now. I'm hungry. What's for dinner? Well, I have these microwavables... but tommorow everything's going to be closed, so I want to save such emergency food. The next obvious choice is to make myself a sandwich, but I think I've had quite enough of sandwiches over the past few days. Well, I say, it's only 8:00, it's not too late... it's time to once again try your hand at cooking. I have various foods my mom had given me before I came here - rice, rice pilaf, macaroni, spaghetti... so, first things first, I need a pot. But I can't find one. I check all the cabinets, and there are several pans, but no pots. Huh. There is, of course, Satory's pot (if it is one, I can't really tell), but that's clearly off limits[0]. So, uh... we have no pot. Great, towels and pots, where am I going to find those?

In the meantime, looks like it's sandwiches again.

-Harry

[0](WHY?! GAH.) Thing I just noticed now: After the bread incident, what he told me was not to take his bread. OK, that sounds normal until you realize what most people would say - "Sure you can have some but ask me first, OK?" Given that, I'm kind of afraid to ask him to borrow the pot...

Harry's entry

I'm wondering about how theorems get named. Babai refers always to the big theorem we today proved[0], and are next time going to begin applying, as "Gowers's theorem" - but I don't think he means that as a name for it, just that, you know, it's Gowers's theorem. A search on "Gowers's theorem" and "Gowers' theorem" do turn up things talking about a "Gowers' theorem", but while it seems to be the same guy, it doesn't seem to be the same theorem. Of course, the most well-known mathematicians often do get theorem name collisions - see "Euler's Theorem", "Lagrange's Theorem", "Gauss's Lemma"...

Speaking of which, I get the idea that the picking on Alex Zorn is not going to stop anytime soon. Yesterday David Cohen was joking that we should give him a Zorn's Lemma problem every day. Today, Arunas (one of the lecturers), for reasons I don't recall, made an aside about Max Zorn, asking Alex for verification - "Zorn was really an algebraic geometer, and was always annoyed that he was remembered just for that lemma. [pause] Of course, it is a very beautiful lemma."

-Harry

[0]Let G be a finite group, and let X,Y, and Z be subsets of G. If |X||Y||Z|≥|G|³/m(G), where m(G) is the minimum dimension of a nontrivial representation of G over R, then ∃x∈X,y∈Y,z∈Z st xy=z. Equivalently, if X,Y,Z meet the conditions stated above, then XYZ=G.