Sunday, October 26, 2008

knol activity

Should I just edit another knol or should I take a step back, stop here, and write about my activity, as I was thinking about doing so for awhile?

my knol is here, it's the main entry. It has three main directions at this time:
I have not touched the first two in weeks. Now too, I feel like mentioning the latter one only, mathematics. Clicking on Mathematics leads to the index of my mathematical knols. Ironically, my index knol got the best rating so far (5 three times out of three). At the present the main parts are:
(after "General" the rest is in the alphabetic order). They are just started. I'd like to present more of the mathematical domains i activities anyway. That's my problem, I'd like too many things. Circumstances amplify this my unfortunate tendency. I'd like to add combinatorics, statistical mechanics, simplicial and cubical theories (topology), elementary mathematical analysis... I am hopeless.

The general part consists of two knols:
  1. Mathematical notation
  2. Mathematics -- two definitions
I should extend both. Knol "Mathematical notation" helps its author, me, to write mathematical knols. I keep "Mth notation" in a window (or Firefox tab) next to the knol under editing, so that I can "borrow" mathematical symbols and similar from "Mth n.", and copy them into the knol window. The more symbols I store there, the easier it is to write m-knols.

I need to stop now, too bad.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

trivia update

knol --:early| Oct11 | Oct12 | oct16 | oct26 |
=============|=======|=======|=======|=======|
m ind -: 5*2 | ditto | ditto |- 5*3 -| ditto |
m nttn : --- |- 4*1 -| ditto | ditto | ditto |
t sp mp: 2*1 | 3.5*2 | ditto | ditto | ditto |
M un 2 : --- | ----- |- 1*1 -| ditto | ditto |
E_H ar : 5*1 | ditto |- 3*2 -| ditto | ditto |
AoA-mrg: 1*1 | ditto | ditto | ditto | ditto |
t s-s i: 3*1 |- 4*2 -| ditto | ditto | ditto |
MN-ec1 : --- |- 5*1 -| ditto | ditto |- 5*2 -|
t-i op : --- |- 5*1 -| ditto | ditto | ditto |
m tria : 5*1 | ditto | ditto | ditto | ditto |
AoA pat: 1*1 | ditto | ditto | ditto | ditto |
NTh gcd: --- | ----- | ----- |- 3*1 -| 2.5*2 |

I was in a hurry. I may double check it later.
(Oct 16)

Was ok. (Oct 26)

Monday, October 13, 2008

Pros and artsy types

I wish I were a pro, meaning the ability to work efficiently in adverse conditions. Unfortunately, I am of the artsy type--after a setback in my everyday life I stop the current project. When I get back into a better mood then I start life anew, meaning a new project. And so it goes. My present project is knol. It is like several projects. I have already started math-knol, Art of Agreeing knol, and dabanese knol. Each of the consists of subtopics, and, of course, mathematics is especially expansive. I am writing about general topology, a special flavor of Euclidean Geometry, and about metric spaces from the purely metric point of view (not topological). I also have, so far only one, short section about set theory--just to establish notions and terminology of the Cartesian product (diagonal product of functions). It's really a small fragment of the theory of categories, if I wrote it in full generality. In topology, at first I am aiming at the universal images. In metric spaces, I am trying fisrt of all to describe the isometric embeddings results. I would like to write on a bunch of topics while on the other hand the notion of giving up on writing, and on devoting myself to learning a new to me, reasonably deep mathematical item, is always present. I am just afraid to do it. I can quickly write a bit of this and of that. But learning good stuff requires my full concentration, piece of mind and better conditions, at least in my case. Write now I am writing this post because I am not able to write some more of my math-knol. Hm, it was supposed to relax me, not to depress :-) Ok, here's something which to me is mildly amusing. The only of my numerous knols which got rating 5 from 2 readers is the index to my math knols. Isn't it ironic to be appreciated for index? (well, it's just 2 guys). I guess, this is due to the fact that Google didn't provide authors with any special tool for hierarchy of their knols, while my index is a substitute for a true software solution.

Well, that was not entertaining, not funny, cannot help it. The sleepiness I feel is marginally relaxing. So, I'll lay down for a couple of minutes, to recharge myself.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

The wonderful anonymous world :-)

My math knol rating honeymoon is over. Within 10 hours of my last blog entry someone (or would it be two independed readers) rated my two math knols as 1 (the lowest). Now the stats are:

knol --:early| Oct11 | Oct12 |
=============|=======|=======|
m ind -: 5*2 | ditto | ditto |
m nttn : --- |- 4*1 -| ditto |
t sp mp: 2*1 | 3.5*2 | ditto |
M un 2 : --- | ----- |- 1*1 -|
E_H ar : 5*1 | ditto |- 3*2 -|
AoA-mrg: 1*1 | ditto | ditto |
t s-s i: 3*1 |- 4*2 -| ditto |
MN-ec1 : --- |- 5*1 -| ditto |
t-i op : --- |- 5*1 -| ditto |
m tria : 5*1 | ditto | ditto |
AoA pat: 1*1 | ditto | ditto |



Let me compute the average:

(10+4+7+1+6+1+8+5+5+5+1) / (2+1+2+1+2+1+2+1+1+1+1)

= 53/15 = 3.5333...

Three single ratings were for Art of Agreement: (1+1+5)/3 = 2.333... It drags me down :-) Nobody rated dabanese. Thus for mathematics alone the average is: 46/12 = 3.8333... However, I got two 5s for the index of all things :-) Also one 4 for my math notation blog. This leaves 32/9 = 3.555... for actual, meritorious blogs. Ooooph, I got my stat trivia.

Saturday, October 11, 2008

my knol stats

Stats are my silly fun, I like stats. Let me here start my knol stats, ratings (there is perhaps just one comment, it's from a young student from India, and it's just a social hello, email-like message rather than a comment). I am too tired right now to make an html table. A naive format will do for the time being.

knol - :early| Oct11 |
=============|=======|
m ind -: 5*2 | ditto |
m nttn : --- |- 4*1 -|
t sp mp: 2*1 | 3.5*2 |
E_H ar : 5*1 | ditto |
AoA-mrg: 1*1 | ditto |
t s-s i: 3*1 |- 4*2 -|
MN-ec1 : --- |- 5*1 -|
t-i op : --- |- 5*1 -|
m tri -: 5*1 | ditto |
AoA pat: 1*1 | ditto |

OK, enough of that. (That was in font Arial).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Courier).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Georgia).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Lucida Grande).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font times).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Trebuchet).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Verdana).
OK, enough of that. (That was in font Webdings).

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Just a blog entry

Any small mistake or negligence in the care of my father by care givers means a dramatic follow up for my father, and a lot of nerves and extra effort by me.

I sleep little these days, and I am often sleepy and unable to work on my projects. Thus I start or restart to work on a project then stop and switch to a new one. Unfortunately, I have stopped again my efforts on baroque numbers. I want to come back to the attractive for me goal of finding a bunch of new baroque numbers, but I already am writing knols on general topology, on euclidean geometry, on art of agreeing, on dabanese. And I'd like to write on many other topics, especially on more mathematical topics: elementary algebraic topology, elementary number theory, combinatorics, on translation lattices, ... Knols possibly will get a larger audience than a blog. Blog can be more of writing for myself mainly. After all, this very entry is sooooooo embarrassingly boring.

In topology, I'd like to present my theory of universal functions; also my cubical polyhedra approach to algebraic topology, and about the geometry of cubical polyhedrons as well. I have outlined the theory of cubical polyhedra back in Poland, in late sixties. Then in 1970, with J.B., when he was my Ph.D. student at UofM in A2, the one and only ever (I wish I had many) we published a series of papers in Italy, and J.B got his degree in a record fast time.

When it comes to number theory, I should stop playing on a kindergarten level, I should learn some advanced tools, analytic or combinatorial (sieves). Elementary games are fun but the advanced ones are so much more!

I got far away from poetry. I am still a bit active on one English language board, and on one Polish board (Poewiki) but it's only inertia, without contributing much of my energy. It's been ages since I've written any poem. I even feel that I am distancing myself from English! Objectively, I do have contact, like this blog, and in general mainly via Internet, a bit from tv, bits and pieces, when I visit my father. Hm, I have more contact with English than with Polish these days. But my contact with native speakers of (American) English is limited, despite one sharing my apt in the past three months or so.

Yes, it's early, only 21:24 but I definitely am sleepy. Let me lie down for a few minutes. Most of the time I am at the care house at this time, but today my father went to bed early. Later, I might to write about my (rather depressing) impressions from the presidential race.

I should check this entry for errors (typos, etc) but I'll stop now. I have this annoying feeling that I use word "but" way too often.

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Simulated annealing (sa) for baroque numbers--a warm up

The idea of applying the simulated annealing method to baroque numbers was with me for a long time. Finally I had invited others on pl.sci.matematyka (on 2007-05-19) to implement it in parallel with me (independently). I wanted to have some company, it'd be interesting. Somehow, after some positive (and negative) feedback, I ended up alone with a first version 2007-July. It was able to repeat the results obtained in 1990-ies. It couldn't do more because I used a 32-bit C++, and I have represented prime powers directly as actual integers, thus limiting them to the range pe <>32 (I even stayed lazily withing pe ≤ 231). Then I barely started to work on a more advanced version 2007-Aug before I already had to stop (for reasons not realated directly to the project). Now, (starting near the end of 2008-August but really this September, I hope) I am trying to psyche myself up for another round. This time I am going to remove the said limitation, and I'd like to actually discover new baroque numbers, not known before.

First let me present here a very naive approach, just for the illustration (I would never actually code it; you may program this way only if you enjoy programming for its own sake). Select a natural number topNum, say topNum := 10000 and an array of primes, say:

P := (2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,73,79}

Your space of "vertices" V consists now of natural numbers n, 1 < 28 =" 22⋅7 is one of them. You want to find baroque numbers, which belong to V. For instance, 28 is one of them; indeed, the sum of divisors of 28 is:

sd(28) = 1+2+4+7+14+28 = 2⋅28


hence brq(28) = 2, which means that 28 is a perfect number.

Now define the penalty function pen(n) as the number of primes p ε P such that there exists natural exponent e for which pe is a divisor of n but not of sd(n). Observe thatg n is baroque if and only if pen(n) = 0. Thus now we may say that our goal is to find many (preferably all) n ε V for which pen(n) = 0.

The algorithm may start with vertex v(0) := 43 (or any other prime from P). Let's assume that the algorithm has already reached vertex v(n). Selecting the next vertex, v(n+1), involves two stages: we select a candidate, then the candidate is accepted with probability prob(n), or rejected. If it is rejected, then we select another candidate, which is going to be accepted as v(n+1), with the same probability prob(n), or rejected, etc., until certain v(n+1) gets finally accepted.

In order to select v(n+1), the algorithm selects randomly a prime p ε P. The product v(n)⋅p is the first candidate for v(n+1). Then it checks condition v(n)⋅p ≤ topNum. If it is satisfied, then it checks penalty: if pen(v(n)⋅p) < pen(n); then v(n+1) := v(n)⋅p is accepted as the next vertex. If the penalty didn't decrease then we still allow a prob(n) := 1/(1 + 10⋅log(1+n)) chance that v(n)⋅p is accepted. If it is rejected, for one reason or another, but p is a divisor of n then v(n+1) := v(n)/n is tried, i.e. the algorithm checks pen(v(n+1)). If v(n+1) := v(n)/n t is accepted then the task of finding the next vertex is accomplished (and algorithm will look for v(n+2)). Otherwise a new prime p ε P is randomly selected and the described candidate process is repeated, etc, until finally a new v(n+1) gets accepted.

The describes algorithm can be discussed, modified, refined but my goal was just to provide an idea how a simulated annealing might work for baroque numbers. Among the shortcomings of the described version is the necessity of representing v(n) actually and directly (naively) as an integer. This either limits the program to a small range of numbers or forces us to use a multi-precision software library--indeed, baroque numbers ten to be huge. In the next posts I'll describe a bit less naive approach.

Remark Above, I have proposed

prob(n) := 1/(1 + 10⋅log(1+n))

One may also try one of the many other possibilities, e.g.

prob(n) := 10/(10 + n1/4)