Ciro Santilli @cirosantilli 40

The finite element method is one of the most common ways to solve PDEs in practice.

Why would physicists use a letter such that:Why? Why?????????

Ciro Santilli is mildly obsessed by nuclear reactions, because they are so quirky. How can a little ball destroy a city? How can putting too much of it together produce criticality and kill people like in the Slotin accident or the Tokaimura criticality accident. It is mind blowing really.

Uranium vs plutonium: Section "Uranium vs plutonium Quora answer by Ciro Santilli".

More fun nuclear stuff to watch:

Some of the most notable ones:

One major difference between the elliptic curve over a finite field or the elliptic curve over the rational numbers the elliptic curve over the real numbers is that not every possible $x$ generates a member of the curve.

This is because on the Equation "Definition of the elliptic curves" we see that given an $x$, we calculate $x^3+ax+b$, which always produces an element $y^2$.

But then we are not necessarily able to find an $y$ for the $y^2$, because not all fields are not quadratically closed fields.

For example: with $a=1$ and $b=1$, taking $x=1$ gives:and therefore there is no $y\in \mathbb{Q}$ that satisfies the equation. So $x=1$ is not on the curve if we consider this elliptic curve over the rational numbers.

That $x$ would also not belong to Elliptic curve over the finite field ${\mathbb{F}}_4$, because doing everything $\mathrm{mod}4$ we have:Therefore, there is no element $y\in {\mathbb{F}}_4$ such that $y\times y=2$ or $y\times y=3$, i.e. $2$ and $3$ don't have a multiplicative inverse.

For the real numbers, it would work however, because the real numbers are a quadratically closed field, and $\sqrt{3}\in \mathbb{R}$.

For this reason, it is not necessarily trivial to determine the number of elements of an elliptic curve.

Given:the norm ends up being:

E.g. in ${\mathbb{C}}^2$:

Ultimate explanation: math.stackexchange.com/questions/776039/intuition-behind-normal-subgroups/3732426#3732426

Only normal subgroups can be used to form quotient groups: their key definition is that they plus their cosets form a group.

Intuition:

One key intuition is that "a normal subgroup is the kernel" of a group homomorphism, and the normal subgroup plus cosets are isomorphic to the image of the isomorphism, which is what the fundamental theorem on homomorphisms says.

Therefore "there aren't that many group homomorphism", and a normal subgroup it is a concrete and natural way to uniquely represent that homomorphism.

The best way to think about the, is to always think first: what is the homomorphism? And then work out everything else from there.

Era of quantum computing before we reach physical errors small enough to do perfect quantum error correction as demonstrated by the quantum threshold theorem.

visualizing the Riemann hypothesis and analytic continuation by 3Blue1Brown (2016) is a good quick visual non-mathematical introduction is to it.

The key question is: how can this continuation be unique since we are defining the function outside of its original domain?

The answer is: due to the identity theorem.

The second protein to have its structure determined, after myoglobin, by X-ray crystallography, in 1965.

Breaks up peptidoglycan present in the bacterial cell wall, which is thicker in Gram-positive bacteria, which is what this enzyme seems to target.

Part of the inate immune system.

It is present on basically everything that mammals and birds excrete, and it kills bacteria, both of which are reasons why it was discovered relatively early on.