Ennui Spaces

I was browsing through Wikipedia today when I came across the definition of pretopological space. The notion seemed very exotic until I thought of a family of examples, which I’m christening ennui spaces.

A pretopological space prescribes for each point the set of (not-necessarily open) neighborhoods of that point. The set of neighborhoods of a given point are required to satisfy some natural axioms, but neighborhoods of one point can be completely unrelated to neighborhoods of another point. A sequence in a pretopological space converges if for any neighborhood, the sequence eventually enters that neighborhood and never leaves it again. A topological space can be turned into a pretopological space by taking as the set of neighborhoods of a point to be all sets that contain an open set that contain that point. You can try to reverse the process by borrowing the characterization of the closure of a set in terms of sequences (or nets), but usually the topological space you construct will have a coarser notion of convergence than the pretopological space.

An ennui space has the same underlying set as a metric space. A neighborhood of a point is any set that contains the unit ball around that point. A sequence in an ennui space converges to a point if is guaranteed to be eventually within one unit of the point. The mental image I have is that the sequence gets close to its destination, but then gets bored. If you try to construct a topology out of this space, you get the indiscrete topology, where all sequences converge to all points. Essentially, all information about the convergence properties of the ennui space are lost.

A practical example of an ennui space would be your computer whenever it simulates a convergent sequence of operations, such as numerical integration or Newton’s method. The computer gets within machine precision of the correct answer, and then stops to light up a Gauloise and discuss L’Être et le néant in a cafe.

Rejecta Mathematica

A reader emailed me about a new online mathematics journal, Rejecta Mathematica. As far as I can tell from reading the FAQ, they only publish articles that have been rejected by peer reviewed journals. The twist is that with your submission, you must include a letter that describes the reasons the paper was rejected as well as any other flaws the paper might have. Submissions are not peer reviewed, and results are not required to be either correct or new, but submissions can be rejected, if they are deemed either incomprehensible or not mathematical.

EGA and SGA

I’m probably the last person to find out about this, but the key works in algebraic geometry of Grothendieck and his collaborators are now accessible online:

TeX Finally Made Functional

This is more of a computer programming post than a math post, but since we all use TeX, I thought it might be of general interest. I came across this paper by Heckman and Wilhelm, which describes how to implement TeX’s algorithm for typesetting math formulas in a functional language (namely, ML). We see the output of this algorithm every time we look at a math paper, but until now it lacked a precise formal description other than what was embedded Knuth’s Pascal code. Since Knuth wrote TeX back when computers were much slower and compilers were much dumber, the code contains many hand optimizations that make the logic hard to follow. (The algorithm itself is too complicated to lend itself to a purely verbal description.) By rewriting it in a functional language, the authors are able to turn the algorithm into a well-defined mathematical function.

New laptop rescued

It turns out that Megan does not take no for an answer from hardware. She beat HP’s laptop into Linux submission, so now I have a working laptop. Hopefully regular posting will resume.

New laptop

I bought a new laptop yesterday. I thought my days of skulking around computer labs was over. But no, HP has managed to make a laptop that doesn’t support Linux. These days, you have to go out of your way to not support Linux. So now I have to take it back and try again.

Stata Center

I see here and here that MIT is suing Frank Gehry over his design of the Stata Center (it leaks, among other problems):

From the pictures it looks quite pretty. I’d be curious to hear if it looks worse in person.

Joys of Pedagogy II

This comment by klein4g helped me clarify for myself exactly what my objection to the examples then definition style of teaching. It’s that the author or speaker is pretending that we’re collectively coming up with the common definition as an act of creativity, when in reality there’s a right answer and the author knows it. It’s the pretense that annoys me.

Getting Back on the Bicycle

It looks like I’m going to have to buy a new laptop: the warranty doesn’t cover the current problem. Hopefully I’ll be able to do that soon, and then a more-normal posting schedule will resume.