The First Isomorphism Theorem The meat of our last primer was a proof that quotient groups are well-defined. One important result that helps us compute groups is a very easy consequence of this well-definition.

Neurons, as an Extension of the Perceptron Model In a previous post in this series we investigated the Perceptron model for determining whether some data was linearly separable. That is, given a data set where the points are labelled in one of two classes, we were interested in finding a hyperplane that separates the classes.

The study of groups is often one’s first foray into advanced mathematics. In the naivete of set theory one develops tools for describing basic objects, and through a first run at analysis one develops a certain dexterity for manipulating symbols and definitions. But it is not until the study of groups that one must step back and inspect the larger picture.

This post assumes familiarity with our primer on Kolmogorov complexity. We recommend the uninformed reader begin there. We will do our best to keep consistent notation across both posts. Kolmogorov Complexity as a Metric Over the past fifty years mathematicians have been piling up more and more theorems about Kolmogorov complexity, and for good reason.

Define the Ramsey number $ R(k,m)$ to be the minimum number $ n$ of vertices required of the complete graph $ K_n$ so that for any two-coloring (red, blue) of the edges of $ K_n$ one of two things will happen: There is a red $ k$-clique; that is, a complete subgraph of $ k$ vertices for which all edges are red. There is a blue $ m$-clique. It is known that these numbers are always finite, but it is very difficult to compute them exactly.

Last time we investigated the (very unintuitive) concept of a topological space as a set of “points” endowed with a description of which subsets are open. Now in order to actually arrive at a discussion of interesting and useful topological spaces, we need to be able to take simple topological spaces and build them up into more complex ones.

Problem: Prove there are infinitely many primes Solution: Denote by $ \pi(n)$ the number of primes less than or equal to $ n$. We will give a lower bound on $ \pi(n)$ which increases without bound as $ n \to \infty$. Note that every number $ n$ can be factored as the product of a square free number $ r$ (a number which no square divides) and a square $ s^2$.

In our last primer we looked at a number of interesting examples of metric spaces, that is, spaces in which we can compute distance in a reasonable way. Our goal for this post is to relax this assumption. That is, we want to study the geometric structure of space without the ability to define distance.

Last time we investigated the k-nearest-neighbors algorithm and the underlying idea that one can learn a classification rule by copying the known classification of nearby data points. This required that we view our data as sitting inside a metric space; that is, we imposed a kind of geometric structure on our data. One glaring problem is that there may be no reasonable way to do this.

Numberphile posted a video today describing a neat trick based on complete sequences: The mathematics here is pretty simple, but I noticed at the end of the video that Dr. Grime was constructing the cards by hand, when really this is a job for a computer program. I thought it would be a nice warmup exercise (and a treat to all of the Numberphile viewers) to write a program to construct the cards for any complete sequence.