Archive for the ‘general’ Category



Arnold’s trinities

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008

Referring to the triple of exceptional Galois groups L_2(5),L_2(7),L_2(11) and its connection to the Platonic solids I wrote : “It sure seems that surprises often come in triples…”. Briefly I considered replacing triples by trinities, but then, I didnt want to sound too mystic…

David Corfield of the n-category cafe and a dialogue on infinity (and perhaps other blogs I’m unaware of) pointed me to the paper Symplectization, complexification and mathematical trinities by Vladimir I. Arnold. (Update : here is a PDF-conversion of the paper)

The paper is a write-up of the second in a series of three lectures Arnold gave in june 1997 at the meeting in the Fields Institute dedicated to his 60th birthday. The goal of that lecture was to explain some mathematical dreams he had.

The next dream I want to present is an even more fantastic set of theorems and conjectures. Here I also have no theory and actually the ideas form a kind of religion rather than mathematics.
The key observation is that in mathematics one encounters many trinities. I shall present a list of examples. The main dream (or conjecture) is that all these trinities are united by some rectangular “commutative diagrams”.
I mean the existence of some “functorial” constructions connecting different trinities. The knowledge of the existence of these diagrams provides some new conjectures which might turn to be true theorems.

Follows a list of 12 trinities, many taken from Arnold’s field of expertise being differential geometry. I’ll restrict to the more algebraically inclined ones.

1 : “The first trinity everyone knows is”

\xymatrix{& \mathbb{C} \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ \mathbb{R} \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & \mathbb{H}} but I would like to alter it into \xymatrix{& \mathbb{H} \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ \mathbb{C} \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & \mathbb{O}}

where \mathbb{H} are the Hamiltonian quaternions. The trinity on the left may be natural to differential geometers who see real and complex and hyper-Kaehler manifolds as distinct but related beasts, but I’m willing to bet that most algebraists would settle for the trinity on the right where \mathbb{O} are the octonians.

2 : The next trinity is that of the exceptional Lie algebras E6, E7 and E8.

\xymatrix{& E_7 \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ E_6 \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & E_8}

with corresponding Dynkin-Coxeter diagrams

Arnold has this to say about the apparent ubiquity of Dynkin diagrams in mathematics.

Manin told me once that the reason why we always encounter this list in many different mathematical classifications is its presence in the hardware of our brain (which is thus unable to discover a more complicated scheme).
I still hope there exists a better reason that once should be discovered.

Amen to that. I’m quite hopeful human evolution will overcome the limitations of Manin’s brain…

3 : Next comes the Platonic trinity of the tetrahedron, cube and dodecahedron

\xymatrix{& Cube \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ Tetra \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & Dode}

Clearly one can argue against this trinity as follows : a tetrahedron is a bunch of triangles such that there are exactly 3 of them meeting in each vertex, a cube is a bunch of squares, again 3 meeting in every vertex, a dodecahedron is a bunch of pentagons 3 meeting in every vertex… and we can continue the pattern. What should be a bunch a hexagons such that in each vertex exactly 3 of them meet? Well, only one possibility : it must be the hexagonal tiling (on the left below). And in normal Euclidian space we cannot have a bunch of septagons such that three of them meet in every vertex, but in hyperbolic geometry this is still possible and leads to the Klein quartic (on the right). Check out this wonderful post by John Baez for more on this.

4 : The trinity of the rotation symmetry groups of the three Platonics

\xymatrix{& S_4 \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ A_4 \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & A_5}

where A_n is the alternating group on n letters and S_n is the symmetric group.

Clearly, any rotation of a Platonic solid takes vertices to vertices, edges to edges and faces to faces. For the tetrahedron we can easily see the 4 of the group A_4, say the 4 vertices. But what is the 4 of S_4 in the case of a cube? Well, a cube has 4 body-diagonals and they are permuted under the rotational symmetries. The most difficult case is to see the 5 of A_5 in the dodecahedron. Well, here’s the solution to this riddle

there are exactly 5 inscribed cubes in a dodecahedron and they are permuted by the rotations in the same way as A_5.

7 : The seventh trinity involves complex polynomials in one variable

\xymatrix{& \mathbb{C}[z,z^{-1}] \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ \mathbb{C}[z] \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & \mathbb{C}[z,z^{-1},(z-1)^{-1}] }

the Laurant polynomials and the modular polynomials (that is, rational functions with three poles at 0,1 and \infty.

8 : The eight one is another beauty

\xymatrix{& TrigonoNumbers \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ Numbers \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & EllipticNumbers }

Here ‘numbers’ are the ordinary complex numbers \mathbb{C}, the ‘trigonometric numbers’ are the quantum version of those (aka q-numbers) which is a one-parameter deformation and finally, the ‘elliptic numbers’ are a two-dimensional deformation. If you ever encountered a Sklyanin algebra this will sound familiar.

This trinity is based on a paper of Turaev and Frenkel and I must come back to it some time…

The paper has some other nice trinities (such as those among Whitney, Chern and Pontryagin classes) but as I cannot add anything sensible to it, let us include a few more algebraic trinities. The first one attributed by Arnold to John McKay

13 : A trinity parallel to the exceptional Lie algebra one is

\xymatrix{& 28-biTangents \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ 27-Lines \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & 120-Tritangents }

between the 27 straight lines on a cubic surface, the 28 bitangents on a quartic plane curve and the 120 tritangent planes of a canonic sextic curve of genus 4.

14 : The exceptional Galois groups

\xymatrix{& L_2(7) \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ L_2(5) \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & L_2(11) }

explained last time.

15 : The associated curves with these groups as symmetry groups (as in the previous post)

\xymatrix{& KleinQuartic \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ Dodecahedron \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & ? }

where the ? refers to the mysterious genus 70 curve. I’ll check with one of the authors whether there is still an embargo on the content of this paper and if not come back to it in full detail.

16 : The three generations of sporadic groups

\xymatrix{& Conway \ar@{-}[rd] & \\ Mathieu \ar@{-}[ru] \ar@{-}[rr] & & Monster }

Do you have other trinities you’d like to worship?

Writing & Blogging

Wednesday, February 27th, 2008

Terry Tao is reworking some of his better blogposts into a book, to be published by the AMS (here’s a preliminary version of the book “What’s New?”)

After some thought, I decided not to transcribe all of my posts from last year (there are 93 of them!), but instead to restrict attention to those articles which (a) have significant mathematical content, (b) are not announcements of material that will be published elsewhere, and (c) are not primarily based on a talk given by someone else. As it turns out, this still leaves about 33 articles from 2007, leading to a decent-sized book of a couple hundred pages in length.

If you have a blog and want to turn it into a LaTeX-book, there’s no need to transcribe or copy every single post, thanks to the WPTeX tool. Note that this is NOT a WP-plugin, but a (simple at that) php-program which turns all posts into a bookcontent.tex file. This file can then be edited further into a proper book.

Unfortunately, the present version chokes on LaTeXrender-code (which is easy enough to solve doing a global ‘find-and-replace’ of the tex-tags by dollar-signs) but worse, on Markdown-code… But then, someone fluent in php-regex will have no problems extending the libs/functions.php file (I hope…).

At the moment I’m considering turning the Mathieu-games-posts into a booklet. A possible title might be Mathieumatical Games. Rereading them (and other posts) I regret to be such an impatient blogger. Often I’m interested in something and start writing posts about it without knowing where or when I’ll land. This makes my posts a lot harder to get through than they might have been, if I would blog only after having digested the material myself… Typical recent examples are the tori-crypto-posts and the Bost-Connes algebra posts.

So, I still have a lot to learn from other bloggers I admire, such as Jennifer Ouellette who maintains the Coctail Party Physics blog. At the moment, Jennifer is resident blogger-journalist at the Kavli Institute where she is running a “Journal Club” workshop giving ideas on how to write better about science.

But the KITP is also committed to fostering scientific communication. That’s where I come in. Each Friday through April 26th, I’ll be presiding over a “Journal Club” meeting focusing on some aspect of communicating science.

Her most recent talk was entitled To Blog or Not to Blog? That is the Question and you can find the slides as well as a QuickTime movie of her talk. They even plan to set up a blog for the participants of the workshop. I will surely follow the rest of her course with keen interest!

good morning math

Wednesday, February 20th, 2008

As if we don’t lie awake enough at night thinking about maths, the Turing Alarm Clock forces us to solve silly counting problems before we can turn the bloody alarm off… (via QED).

music of the primes (1)

Wednesday, February 13th, 2008

This semester, I’m running a 3rd year course on Marcus du Sautoy’s The music of the primes. The concept being that students may suggest topics, merely sketched in the book, and then we’ll go a little deeper into them.

I’ve been rather critical about the book before, but, rereading it last week (and knowing a bit better the limitations of bringing mathematics to the masses…) I think du Sautoy did a great job. Sure, it focusses too much on people and places and too little on mathematics, but that goes with the format.

I wanted to start off gently by playing the open-university dvd-series so that students would have a very rough outline of the book from the very start (as well as a mental image to some of the places mentioned, such as Bletchley Park, the IAS, Gottingen…). However, the vagueness of it all seemed to work on their nerves … in particular the trumpet scenes

Afterwards, they demanded that I should explain next week what on earth the zeroes of the Riemann zeta function had to do with counting primes and what all this nonsensical ‘music of the primes’ was about.

Well, here is the genuine music of the primes (taken from the Riemann page by Jeffrey Stopple whose excellent introductory text A Primer of Analytic Number Theory I’ll use to show them some concrete stuff (they have their first course on complex analysis also this semester, so I cannot go too deep into it).

Jeffrey writes “This sound is best listened to with headphones or external speakers. For maximum effect, play it LOUD.” But, what is the story behind it?

The Von Mangoldt function \Lambda(n) assigns log(p) whenever n=p^k is a prime power and zero otherwise. One can then consider the function

\Psi(x) = \frac{1}{2}(\sum_{n < x} \Lambda(n) + \sum_{n \leq x} \Lambda(n))

which makes a jump at prime power values and the jump-size depends on the prime. Here is a graph of its small values

It’s not quite the function \pi(x) (counting the number of primes smaller than x) but it sure contains enough information to obtain this provided we have a way of describing \Psi(x).

The Riemann zeta function (or rather ~(s-1)\zeta(s)) has two product descriptions, the Hadamard product formula (running over all zeroes, both the trivial ones at -2n and those in the critical strip), which is valid for all complex s and the Euler product valid for all Re(s) > 1. This will allow us to calculate in two different ways \zeta'(s)/\zeta(s) which in turn allows us to have an explicit description of \Psi(s) known as the Von Mangoldt formula

\Psi(x) = x - \frac{1}{2}log(1 - \frac{1}{x^2}) - log(2 \pi) - \sum_{\rho} \frac{x^{\rho}}{\rho}

where only the last term depends on the zeta-zeroes \rho lying in the critical strip (and conjecturally all lying on the line Re(x) = \frac{1}{2}. The first few terms (those independent of the zeroes) give a continuous approximation of \Psi(x) but how on earth can we get from that approxamation (on the left) to the step-like function itself (on the right)?

We can group together zeta-zeroes \rho=\beta + i \gamma with their comlex conjugate zeroes \overline{\rho} and then one shows that the attribution to the Von Mangoldt formula is

\frac{x^{\rho}}{\rho} + \frac{x^{\overline{\rho}}}{\overline{rho}} = \frac{2 x^{\beta}}{| \rho | }cos(\gamma log(x) - arctan(\gamma/\beta))

Ignoring the term x^{\beta} this is a peridodic function with amplitude 2/| \rho | (so getting smaller for larger and larger zeroes) and period 2\pi/ \gamma. If the Riemann hypothesis holds (meaning that \beta=1/2 for all zeroes) one can even split a term in this contribution of every zero as a sort of ‘universal amplitude’. What is left is then a sum of purely periodic functions which a physicist will view as a superposition of (sound) waves and that is the music played by the primes!

Below, a video of the influence of adding the first 100 zeroes to a better and better approximation of \Psi(x) (again taken from the Riemann page by Jeffrey Stopple). Surely watching the video will convince anyone of the importance of the Riemann zeta-zeroes to the prime-counting problem..

Blackle

Monday, February 11th, 2008

There seems to be a slight chance that the next US-administration may (finally) be joining the rest of the civilized world and sign the Kyoto-treaty. Here’s an appeal to Flock and other webbrowsers : please add blackle.com to our Search Engine Preferences!

The idea is simple : you Google as you’d do anyway but … you save a lot of energy. Via PD2 (for Pseudonymous Daughter 2).

AWSOM Powered