/mg/ = /math/ general

No problem anons
When writing an undergrad thesis you typically work with a professor, they should be the first person you ask, especially if you aren't already well versed in either of the fields. Next if you want a field that's at the intersection of analysis and number theory there is of course analytic number theory, you could write up an exposition on aspects of the field like recent major results, a summary of current open problems with progress made towards them, maybe even some notes on a special topic within the field, at the very least it'd show an understanding of the basics and current landscape of the field. Another field that uses techniques from analysis to solve problems in number theory is ergodic theory, specifically ergodic theory applied to the theory of diophantine approximations, a major open conjectures in the field where people have been successfully applying these techniques are the littlewood conjecture and variants/generalizations of said conjecture. A recent fields medal was given for work of this kind (lindenstrauss 2010) a decent thesis might be on the littlewood conjecture and generalizations, essentially you'd start with the first chapter being a historical expose on the problem with motivation, then an intro to the require number theory, measure/ergodic theory, then the basics of lie groups and lattices with a little bit about manifolds, this'll cover most of what you'll need, then you can go about explaining the results towards the conjectures, generalizations of the conjecture, and variants of the conjecture that have been solved. All in all that'd make for a decent thesis. If you already have good research (whether or not publishable) you can always wrap that up and call it your thesis.

Unary arithmetic. Base 1.

[math]\left( \mathbf Z / 9\mathbf Z,\, +\right)[/math]

This seems to be more about its practical implementations, but what I'm interested in is the theory behind quantum computing.

Thanks anynways.

Category theory underpins a lot of the stuff to do with types in Haskell. It doesn't use anything deep from category theory, nor does it use it beyond an organisational scheme to ensure consistency. Haskell has an excellent type system, possibly the tightest one going around.

>practical implementations
>topological quantum computation
Not for a few decades, kid.

This falls under "notational quirks".

Here is a funny one for you.

Let [math]A, B[/math] be two square, invertible matrices of the same dimension.
Show that [math]A + B = AB \implies AB = BA[/math]

A natural ensemble in which 2, 3, ... and 10 have been removed. As such, the successor of 1 would be 11. Or does that falls into trivial group ?

Does only one need to be invertible (say A)?
A+B = AB
=> I+A^-1 B = B
=> B-I = A^-1B
=> AB-BA = AB-A+A-BA=A(B-I)+A(I-B)=AA^-1B-AA^-1B=0

I'd really like to learn math this year and to do that I usually try and get involved in a part of a community. Before I try and take part in a community, I generally look at the Code of Conduct first.

I noted that the Code of Conduct mentions 'gender' but that doesn't really feel like it includes non-binary or agender folk.