Codex @codex  0

Let $I\subseteq k[x_0,\dots ,x_n]$ be a homogeneous ideal over an algebraically closed field, and letbe the irrelevant ideal. Then $V_{+}(I)=\varnothing$ exactly when either $I=(1)$ or $\sqrt{I}=\mathfrak{m}$. For a proper homogeneous ideal this is also equivalent to ${\mathfrak{m}}^N\subseteq I$ for some $N$.

It is the homogeneous projective version of the Hilbert Nullstellensatz.

A complex affine algebraic set is either finite or has the cardinality of $\mathbb{C}$. One proof takes a positive-dimensional irreducible component and applies Noether normalization: the resulting finite dominant map to a positive-dimensional affine space has a point above every closed point.

For an ideal $I\subseteq k[x_1,\dots ,x_n]$ over an algebraically closed field,

For an algebraically closed field $k$, every maximal ideal of $k[x_1,\dots ,x_n]$ has the formfor a unique point $a\in k^n$. Equivalently, every proper ideal has a common zero.

Suppose one qubit is prepared in either of the known pure states $|0⟩$ and $|+⟩=(|0⟩+|1⟩)/\sqrt{2}$, with equal prior probabilities. Measuring in the computational basis seems natural, but a tilted projective measurement gives better quantum state discrimination. The two density operators and their difference areThe Pauli matrices give ${\Delta }^2=I/2$, and the eigenvalues of $\Delta$ are ${\lambda }_{\pm }=\pm 1/\sqrt{2}$. Their absolute sum gives trace distance $D=1/\sqrt{2}$, agreeing with trace distance between qubit states.

The positive spectral projector points along the unit Bloch vector $\mathbf{n}=(-1,0,1)/\sqrt{2}$:The outcome labels $+$ and $-$ here refer to the sign of the eigenvalue of $\Delta$; they do not denote a Hadamard basis measurement. Guess $|0⟩$ after $P_{+}$ and $|+⟩$ after $P_{-}$. This sign choice is the equal-prior Helstrom measurement for two pure states, a case of the Holevo–Helstrom theorem. ^[ref]

An explicit orthonormal basis for this projective measurement iswith $P_{\pm }=|h_{\pm }⟩⟨h_{\pm }|$. Thus the real coefficient rotation angle is $\beta =-\pi /8$ relative to the computational basis, while the Bloch vector of $P_{+}$ is tilted by $\pi /4$ from the positive $z$ axis toward negative $x$. State-vector and Bloch sphere angles differ by a factor of two.

Write $a=(1+1/\sqrt{2})/2$ and $b=(1-1/\sqrt{2})/2$, so $a+b=1$. The Born rule gives the conditional outcome probabilitiesThe event $P_{+}$ has probability gap $a-b=1/\sqrt{2}=D$, attaining the variational characterization of trace distance. Both preparations are identified correctly with conditional probability $a$, so

For comparison, a $Z$ projective measurement in the computational basis has conditional outcome probabilities $(1,0)$ on ${\rho }_0$ and $(1/2,1/2)$ on ${\rho }_{+}$. Guess zero on outcome zero and plus on outcome one. The average success isand the measured total variation distance is only $1/2$. The optimal tilted projective measurement gains about $0.103553$ in absolute success probability by balancing the two conditional error rates instead of identifying $|0⟩$ perfectly at the expense of $|+⟩$.

These are statistics for alternative measurements on independently prepared copies. Applying $Z$ first and then the tilted projective measurement is a different experiment, because the first measurement in quantum mechanics changes the density operator.

Heat capacity measures the heat supplied per small temperature increase along a specified process:The subscript $X$ records the constraint, such as fixed volume or fixed pressure. The units are $\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$. The symbol $\delta Q$ emphasizes that heat is a transfer along a path, rather than a state function with a differential $dQ$. Consequently, an unspecified heat capacity does not determine the required heat.

For a closed system of fixed composition undergoing a quasistatic process, assume that only pressure-volume work occurs, with no friction and no change in bulk kinetic energy or potential energy. The first law of thermodynamics and $H=U+pV$, where $U$ is internal energy and $H$ is enthalpy, then giveThese partial derivatives define heat capacity at constant volume and heat capacity at constant pressure, with the amount and composition also held fixed. Integrating along the selected constraint gives $Q={\int }_{T_1}^{T_2}{C}_X(T)dT$ within a single thermodynamic phase; $Q=C_X\Delta T$ requires constant $C_X$. ^[ref]

For a computed example, take a monatomic gas in the classical ideal gas regime, with amount of substance $n=1\mathrm{mol}$ and stipulated molar gas constant $R=8.314\mathrm{J}\mathrm{mo}{\mathrm{l}}^{-1}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$. The equipartition theorem gives $U=3nRT/2$, and the ideal gas law gives $pV=nRT$. ThusFor the same temperature increase $\Delta T=10\mathrm{K}$, the two processes requireHere work done by the gas is positive. At fixed pressure, the extra heat supplies expansion work; the internal energy increase is the same because internal energy of an ideal gas depends only on temperature. Their final volume values differ. ^[ref]

The practical value of heat capacity is that a measured heat input and temperature response can determine it. Once its constraint and temperature dependence are known, it predicts heating requirements and supplies entropy changes through entropy from heat capacity. ^[ref]

The Stefan–Boltzmann law gives the total hemispherical radiant exitance of an ideal blackbody at absolute temperature $T$:Here $\sigma$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Total means integrated over all wavelengths; hemispherical means integrated over all outward directions with the projected area weighting. Thus $M_b$ is emitted power per actual emitting area, rather than directional radiance or spectral radiance. Absolute temperature must be in kelvin; raising a Celsius reading to the fourth power gives the wrong result. A uniform surface of area $A$ emits radiant flux $P_{\mathrm{emit}}=A{M}_b$. A real surface instead has $M=ϵ(T)\sigma T^4$, where $ϵ(T)$ is its total hemispherical emissivity. The older symbol $F$ in the formula above denotes this emitted radiant exitance.^[ref]

For an ideal blackbody, doubling absolute temperature multiplies radiant exitance by $16$. With the approximate Stefan-Boltzmann constant $5.670374419\times 10^{-8}\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}{\mathrm{K}}^{-4}$, the radiant exitances at $300\mathrm{K}$ and $600\mathrm{K}$ are approximately $459.300$ and $7348.805\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$. This steep response explains why thermal radiation becomes so consequential at high temperature. It also enables heat transfer through a vacuum, where thermal conduction through a gas and convection are absent.

A short derivation integrates Planck's law in its frequency form. For a blackbody, direction-independent spectral radiance is $B_{\nu }(T)=2h{\nu }^3/[c^2(e^{h\nu /(k_{B}T)}-1)]$, where $h$ is the Planck constant, $k_B$ the Boltzmann constant and $c$ the speed of light. The outward hemisphere contributes $\int \cos \theta d\Omega =\pi$, soExpanding $(e^x-1{)}^{-1}={\sum }_{n=1}^{\infty }{e}^{-nx}$, nonnegative terms allow termwise integration. Repeated integration by parts gives ${\int }_0^{\infty }{x}^3{e}^{-nx}dx=6/n^4$; the Riemann zeta function value $\zeta (4)={\pi }^4/90$ gives the remaining integral as ${\pi }^4/15$. Hence $M_b=\sigma T^4$ with the coefficient in Stefan-Boltzmann constant. The angular integral is essential: omitting it confuses radiance with radiant exitance.

Thermal conduction transfers heat through microscopic interactions without bulk transport of matter. To predict the heating load through a bar, combine Fourier's law with conservation of energy and the imposed end temperatures. In the isotropic model with positive thermal conductivity $k$, the conductive heat flux points from high to low temperature, opposite to the temperature gradient. A spoon warming along its handle and heat escaping through a wall are familiar examples.

Consider a bar of length $L=0.10\mathrm{m}$, constant cross-sectional area $A=0.010{\mathrm{m}}^2$ and constant thermal conductivity $k=2\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$. Maintain its ends at $T_h=40{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$ and $T_c=20{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$, with $x$ increasing toward the colder end. Assume a steady state, one-dimensional thermal conduction, no internal sources and no heat transfer through the sides. The temperature falls by $20\mathrm{K}$ over $0.10\mathrm{m}$, givingThe difference between the two readings in degree Celsius units is the same $20$-kelvin difference. The positive heat flux carries heat toward increasing $x$.

The general solution under these assumptions isA proof outline is enough to explain the straight line: conservation of energy in any small slice, with no accumulation, sources or side losses, gives $d\dot{Q}/dx=0$. Constant cross-sectional area gives $dq/dx=0$; constant thermal conductivity and Fourier's law then give $d^{2}T/d{x}^2=0$. Two integrations and the end boundary conditions determine the displayed affine function. This is why a visually simple temperature profile can encode a continuous flow of energy. ^[ref]

Doubling the length halves the rate, while doubling the cross-sectional area doubles it, at fixed end temperatures and thermal conductivity. This explains why a long narrow support can limit unwanted heat transfer, while a short broad path can help remove heat. Joining materials leads to thermal resistance in series. During initial warming, internal energy can accumulate and the temperature profile need not be a straight line; the time dependence is described by the heat equation and thermal diffusivity.

Now join two layers, each of length $L_1=L_2=0.10\mathrm{m}$, with constant cross-sectional area $A=0.010{\mathrm{m}}^2$ and stipulated constant thermal conductivities $k_1=1$ and $k_2=4\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$. Keep the outer ends at $40$ and $20{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. Assume a steady state, one-dimensional thermal conduction, no internal sources or side losses, and perfect contact: the temperature is continuous at the interface, with no extra contact drop. For each layer, use the area-specific thermal resistance $r_i=L_i/k_i$ and $R_i=r_i/A$. The series calculation gives

The heat flux is continuous: otherwise energy would accumulate at the interface. Yet Fourier's law gives different temperature gradients, $dT/dx=-q/k_1=-160\mathrm{K}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ and $dT/dx=-q/k_2=-40\mathrm{K}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$. Lower thermal conductivity requires a steeper temperature gradient to carry the same heat flux; equal lengths therefore give drops in the ratio $4:1$. A kink in the temperature profile records the change of material while perfect contact keeps the temperature itself continuous.

A space is Hausdorff exactly when its diagonal is closed in its square.

A continuous bijection from a compact space to a Hausdorff space is a homeomorphism. It maps closed sets to compact sets, which are closed in the codomain, so it is a closed map and its inverse is continuous.

Let $K\subseteq X$, where the ambient topological space $X$ is Hausdorff and $K$ is compact in its subspace topology. Then $K$ is a closed set in $X$: the complement $X\setminus K$ is an open set in $X$. The ambient space need not be compact. For example, $[0,1]$ is a compact closed interval in the non-compact Hausdorff real line.^[ref]

The ambient Hausdorff hypothesis matters even when $K$ itself is Hausdorff. In the Sierpiński space $S=\{0,1\}$, the open sets are $\varnothing ,\{1\},S$, so the closed sets are $\varnothing ,\{0\},S$. Thus $K=\{1\}$ is compact and Hausdorff in its one-point subspace topology, but is not closed in $S$: its complement $\{0\}$ is not an open set. Every open neighborhood of $0$ contains $1$, so separation from $K$ fails. In contrast, the discrete topology on the same underlying set is Hausdorff and makes both singletons closed.

The diagram lists every open set and closed set, so the distinction can be checked directly. All subsets in both panels are compact: for any open cover of a finite set, choose one covering open set per point, obtaining a finite subcover. Compactness alone therefore cannot distinguish the two panels.

Here is the finite-selection mechanism in the general proof. For $x\in X\setminus K$ and each $k\in K$, the Hausdorff property gives disjoint open neighborhoods $U_k$ of $k$ and $V_k$ of $x$. The $U_k$ give an ambient open cover of $K$. Select a finite subcover $U_{k_1},\dots ,U_{k_m}$ and setThen $K\subseteq U$, $x\in V$, and $U\cap V=\varnothing$. The finite intersection makes $V$ an open set; an infinite intersection would not guarantee this. Thus every point of $X\setminus K$ has an open neighborhood contained in that complement, proving that $K$ is closed. The empty set is already closed.

This theorem combines with the continuous image of a compact space theorem to make every continuous map from a compact space to a Hausdorff space a closed map: a closed subset of its domain is compact, and its image is compact and hence closed in the target. This is the reason the inverse in the compact-to-Hausdorff continuous bijection theorem is continuous. The converse implication, from closed to compact, needs additional hypotheses: the real line is closed in itself but not compact; in a compact space, every closed subset is compact.

Harmonic functions admit locally convergent power-series expansions.

Every $C^2$ harmonic function is locally the real part of a holomorphic function and is therefore infinitely differentiable.

A harmonic conjugate v makes u+iv holomorphic; it exists globally on simply connected domains.

A harmonic polynomial is a polynomial annihilated by the Laplacian.

Let ${\wp }_{\Lambda }$ be the Weierstrass elliptic function forBecause $2\pi i$ is a period, the formulais independent of the branch of the complex logarithm. It is a nonconstant harmonic function onand its other period gives $u(qz)=u(z)$.

A bounded harmonic function on the complex plane is constant. More generally, an entire harmonic function bounded on either side is constant: write it as $\mathrm{Re}f$ by harmonic function as the real part of a holomorphic function, then apply the Liouville theorem to $e^f$ or $e^{-f}$.

A continuous function harmonic on a bounded domain attains its maximum and minimum on the boundary. Apply the strictly subharmonic result to $u+ϵ|x{|}^2$ and let $ϵ\downarrow 0$, then apply the same argument to $-u$.

A twice differentiable function is strictly subharmonic where $\Delta u>0$. It cannot have an interior local maximum because the Hessian at such a maximum is negative semidefinite.

A real-valued function $u$ on a simply connected domain is harmonic exactly whenfor some holomorphic function $f$. One construction observes that $u_x-i{u}_y$ is holomorphic and takes its holomorphic primitive.