Now then, where were we?
Sep. 19th, 2009 01:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sniffnoyStill writing up my result. First I wrote up the easy parts; then I spent a bunch of time rearranging the easy parts to make more sense; then I spent a bunch of time editing that so that it flows better. Now I'm writing the hard parts. I'd say there are three hard parts, of which I am almost done with the second (describing how I've computed g_r(k) without the abstraction).
It occurs to me that I really haven't checked the articles in Guy's email to Josh about this - since Guy didn't mention anything that seemed relevant, I assumed there wasn't, but I should really check... but now I've changed my point of view on what I've actually proved, maybe there was. It would be pretty annoying if someone else proved the same thing, but never used it to show that f(2^18 3^m)=36+3m, and therefore wasn't mentioned... I should also check the references on Sloane, it has some sequences related to f in it. (And you can be sure once this is done, I'm going to submit this sequence of numbers. By which I mean, numbers n such that f(m)<f(n)⇒m<n, which are given by the two forms I've listed earlier. Because that sequence is not in there. Which I guess does suggest nobody has done this before. :) )
Lie algebras is cool, alpha[0] topology is boring so far, teaching 105 is hard; but you probably guessed all that.
Regarding topology: Yeah, I have to take alpha topology. When it was QR signup time, I figured of course the algebra, I'll try my hand at the topology, and I won't even bother with the analysis. Well, algebra was no trouble. Topology... it's Saturday morning, I sit down with the first half of the test, realize I don't know half this stuff, and decide "screw it, I'm going back to sleep".
Regarding 105: My second lesson was a real disaster as I didn't prepare properly, but that hasn't happened since. My boardwork still really needs work. You know what else I'm terrible at? All the non-teaching parts of the job, or that require explaining things other than mathematics (course policies, etc). To them it's crucial, but to me it's quite secondary and I tend to forget about it when not explicitly reminded. Now on Fridays they have me down in the MathLab helping kids individually, and there, of course, I feel much more at home. None of my students has yet to show up to my office hours, though, and I'm inclined to think that's a bad thing.
...enough math for now.
So Aubrey[3] left for Australia for some solar car competition this Monday, leading to a game night on Sunday. Played Shadows over Camelot. If you haven't heard of it, it's a co-op game, with the possibility that one player is a traitor. The way that's determined is, there are 8 loyalty cards, and each player gets one; one of the loyalty cards reads "traitor". So with the maximum of 7 people, which we had, there's probably a traitor. Well, guess what. We had no traitor, and we had 7 people, and we still only barely pulled off a win... I guess I see why I'd seen people saying on BGG[4] that they often play without one. I guess co-op games have to be hard by nature, huh? In the same way that one-player games have to be hard. It's not really something I'm used to outside of video games. Oh, and I should note, we also didn't realize that the rulebook said that you shouldn't discuss the specific contents of cards in your hand/secret cards that you'd seen, so we had another advantage that way. I think that's a bit silly; what's the point of limiting player communication? I suppose the point is to actually make it a co-op game, with different roles. Basically because people can communicate so much, in a board game, that's pretty hard, and I'm inclined to think it's not really something very well-suited to the boardgame format at all. Video games can accomplish this pretty easily, by contrast. In any case, I would think better than telling the players not to communicate is to, you know, give them some incentive not to, such as by having a traitor... or multiple, if one is not enough... (mind you, I have no objection to rules against people revealing their stuff to prove what they say, just to rules limiting what people can say.)
Still on the whole Truth House is kind of boring so far compared to Tufts House, i.e. people don't seem to be around as much. I'm guessing the fact that the lounge isn't the center of the house like in Tufts House contributes to that... we also have very few videogames in the lounge, which is kind of sensible, as there have been some break-ins... but right now we just have the house Wii (which is bolted to this frame which is... yeah) with pretty much just Brawl for it, and my Dreamcast (as who's going to steal a Dreamcast?). Still, I've seen other games being played, just nobody is willing to leave them down there.
So I found the third game store, the one I saw on the way in; it too isn't too far away. And it's pretty cool - it has old used video games for lots of old systems; there were Atari 2600 games there. No Dreamcast though. :-/ It's called "Get Your Game On". And, get this, they're hosting a Zendikar prerelease. Maybe I should go? Maybe this is a time for me to get back into Magic? I'll admit, though, that I haven't actually computed how much money I'll have - this first month I've been really just living off of what I have stashed away without too much thought; soon I'll have to actually start figuring out just how much disposable income I actually have. But hell, maybe it's worth going to this anyway. Of course, knowing me, there's a good chance the correct answer is "No, you shouldn't go buying cards, because that would require finding people to play against, which would probably largely mean going to organized events, and you're too lazy for that."
I swear, there was somehing else I wanted to mention, the same thing I forgot about last time - I know this because I remembered it briefly; but I've forgotten it again.
I haven't started playing Kongai again. The internet connection here is really pretty inconsistent. I guess Kyle[5] has appointed a network steward now, no? Not that he'd likely know immediately just what's going on, as I think he's a first-year here too, but oh well. It's certainly the sort of thing he should be trying to fix...
Of course, why do I think I'll have so much time? I'm teaching 105, and largely I've had time so far because only now have I had to begin actually grading things, not to mention my own homework which has basically just begun...
-Harry
[0]Alpha sequences: At Michigan there are basic sequences in algebra, topology, analysis, for grad students. Unlike at Chicago, these really are pretty basic, and certainly not mandatory... but you do have to take them if you don't pass the appropriate qualifying review. Well, or you could just take the QR again later, but if you didn't pass the QR, you probably need to take them... or at least when you do as badly as I did... see above.
[3]Mentioned him briefly before - another math PhD student, who lived in Truth House, and plays a lot of boardgames, and does parkour, and is generally pretty awesome, but will not be here this semester.
[4]I really rarely visit BGG anymore...
[5]The work manager, responsible for assigning people's jobs. This is the same Kyle who actually plays in Brawl tournaments. There is another Kyle, who is, IINM, the network steward I was just speaking of.
It occurs to me that I really haven't checked the articles in Guy's email to Josh about this - since Guy didn't mention anything that seemed relevant, I assumed there wasn't, but I should really check... but now I've changed my point of view on what I've actually proved, maybe there was. It would be pretty annoying if someone else proved the same thing, but never used it to show that f(2^18 3^m)=36+3m, and therefore wasn't mentioned... I should also check the references on Sloane, it has some sequences related to f in it. (And you can be sure once this is done, I'm going to submit this sequence of numbers. By which I mean, numbers n such that f(m)<f(n)⇒m<n, which are given by the two forms I've listed earlier. Because that sequence is not in there. Which I guess does suggest nobody has done this before. :) )
Lie algebras is cool, alpha[0] topology is boring so far, teaching 105 is hard; but you probably guessed all that.
Regarding topology: Yeah, I have to take alpha topology. When it was QR signup time, I figured of course the algebra, I'll try my hand at the topology, and I won't even bother with the analysis. Well, algebra was no trouble. Topology... it's Saturday morning, I sit down with the first half of the test, realize I don't know half this stuff, and decide "screw it, I'm going back to sleep".
Regarding 105: My second lesson was a real disaster as I didn't prepare properly, but that hasn't happened since. My boardwork still really needs work. You know what else I'm terrible at? All the non-teaching parts of the job, or that require explaining things other than mathematics (course policies, etc). To them it's crucial, but to me it's quite secondary and I tend to forget about it when not explicitly reminded. Now on Fridays they have me down in the MathLab helping kids individually, and there, of course, I feel much more at home. None of my students has yet to show up to my office hours, though, and I'm inclined to think that's a bad thing.
...enough math for now.
So Aubrey[3] left for Australia for some solar car competition this Monday, leading to a game night on Sunday. Played Shadows over Camelot. If you haven't heard of it, it's a co-op game, with the possibility that one player is a traitor. The way that's determined is, there are 8 loyalty cards, and each player gets one; one of the loyalty cards reads "traitor". So with the maximum of 7 people, which we had, there's probably a traitor. Well, guess what. We had no traitor, and we had 7 people, and we still only barely pulled off a win... I guess I see why I'd seen people saying on BGG[4] that they often play without one. I guess co-op games have to be hard by nature, huh? In the same way that one-player games have to be hard. It's not really something I'm used to outside of video games. Oh, and I should note, we also didn't realize that the rulebook said that you shouldn't discuss the specific contents of cards in your hand/secret cards that you'd seen, so we had another advantage that way. I think that's a bit silly; what's the point of limiting player communication? I suppose the point is to actually make it a co-op game, with different roles. Basically because people can communicate so much, in a board game, that's pretty hard, and I'm inclined to think it's not really something very well-suited to the boardgame format at all. Video games can accomplish this pretty easily, by contrast. In any case, I would think better than telling the players not to communicate is to, you know, give them some incentive not to, such as by having a traitor... or multiple, if one is not enough... (mind you, I have no objection to rules against people revealing their stuff to prove what they say, just to rules limiting what people can say.)
Still on the whole Truth House is kind of boring so far compared to Tufts House, i.e. people don't seem to be around as much. I'm guessing the fact that the lounge isn't the center of the house like in Tufts House contributes to that... we also have very few videogames in the lounge, which is kind of sensible, as there have been some break-ins... but right now we just have the house Wii (which is bolted to this frame which is... yeah) with pretty much just Brawl for it, and my Dreamcast (as who's going to steal a Dreamcast?). Still, I've seen other games being played, just nobody is willing to leave them down there.
So I found the third game store, the one I saw on the way in; it too isn't too far away. And it's pretty cool - it has old used video games for lots of old systems; there were Atari 2600 games there. No Dreamcast though. :-/ It's called "Get Your Game On". And, get this, they're hosting a Zendikar prerelease. Maybe I should go? Maybe this is a time for me to get back into Magic? I'll admit, though, that I haven't actually computed how much money I'll have - this first month I've been really just living off of what I have stashed away without too much thought; soon I'll have to actually start figuring out just how much disposable income I actually have. But hell, maybe it's worth going to this anyway. Of course, knowing me, there's a good chance the correct answer is "No, you shouldn't go buying cards, because that would require finding people to play against, which would probably largely mean going to organized events, and you're too lazy for that."
I swear, there was somehing else I wanted to mention, the same thing I forgot about last time - I know this because I remembered it briefly; but I've forgotten it again.
I haven't started playing Kongai again. The internet connection here is really pretty inconsistent. I guess Kyle[5] has appointed a network steward now, no? Not that he'd likely know immediately just what's going on, as I think he's a first-year here too, but oh well. It's certainly the sort of thing he should be trying to fix...
Of course, why do I think I'll have so much time? I'm teaching 105, and largely I've had time so far because only now have I had to begin actually grading things, not to mention my own homework which has basically just begun...
-Harry
[0]Alpha sequences: At Michigan there are basic sequences in algebra, topology, analysis, for grad students. Unlike at Chicago, these really are pretty basic, and certainly not mandatory... but you do have to take them if you don't pass the appropriate qualifying review. Well, or you could just take the QR again later, but if you didn't pass the QR, you probably need to take them... or at least when you do as badly as I did... see above.
[3]Mentioned him briefly before - another math PhD student, who lived in Truth House, and plays a lot of boardgames, and does parkour, and is generally pretty awesome, but will not be here this semester.
[4]I really rarely visit BGG anymore...
[5]The work manager, responsible for assigning people's jobs. This is the same Kyle who actually plays in Brawl tournaments. There is another Kyle, who is, IINM, the network steward I was just speaking of.
