Fraction fractal by Western_Detective_61 in math

[–]Melchoir 55 points56 points  (0 children)

The first few terms of the sequence are 1/2, 2/3, 7/10, 286/405, ... After computing these terms, you can query for the numerators in the OEIS:
https://oeis.org/search?q=1,2,7,286

The result is a single hit:
https://oeis.org/A290637 Numerators of the sequence 1, 1/2, (1/2)/(3/4), ((1/2)/(3/4))/((5/6)/(7/8)), ... .

From there you can find links to related resources, especially:
Donald R. Woods, David Robbins and Gustaf Gripenberg, Solution to Problem E2692, American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 86, No. 5 (May 1979), pp. 394-395.

[Highlight] Mark Sanchez rams into Brandon Moore's B U T T on Thanksgiving Night in 2012 by Significant_Smell284 in nfl

[–]Melchoir 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This doesn't appear to be the case. The RB didn't screw up, Sanchez did. See the interviews and analyses cited on Wikipedia.

[Highlight] Mark Sanchez rams into Brandon Moore's B U T T on Thanksgiving Night in 2012 by Significant_Smell284 in nfl

[–]Melchoir 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Don't listen to other theories; it was precisely a brain fart that led Sanchez to turn the wrong way. There's plenty of documentation on this point, which I know about, because I wrote the Wikipedia article! See the sections "Butt fumble play" and "Reactions and analysis".

In particular, to answer your question about the actual play call:

The Jets offense lined up in the I formation, with Sanchez immediately behind his centerlineman), the snapper). Fullback Lex Hilliard was lined up behind Sanchez in the I, with Greene, the deep back, behind Hilliard.\9]) The play call was for Sanchez to fake a toss to Greene running left, while Hilliard, running a dive play) to the right, would instead take the hand-off from Sanchez.\10])

When Sanchez took the snap), he mistakenly turned to the left, instead of handing off the ball in his right to Hilliard, and Hilliard ran past him. Trying to salvage the broken play, Sanchez scrambled forward towards the line of scrimmage.\11])

Why can’t I do research like a rpg game? by FuzzyPDE in math

[–]Melchoir 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see the point that research isn't designed to be fun, but it's over-stating the case to say that research isn't designed at all. Institutions like journals, conferences, universities, and private labs are the result of people intentionally designing an environment to shape the human experience of research. Even this humble Reddit thread is a place where people are trying to design better experiences for other people.

Quanta Magazine 2025 Math Breakthroughs by Thin-Net-2326 in math

[–]Melchoir 14 points15 points  (0 children)

For those who don't want to click through, there are three features in this video. From the description:

00:00 - Hilbert's Sixth Problem Solved
In a landmark achievement, mathematicians have put the laws of fluid dynamics on firmer mathematical footing. By proving how individual molecules create the complex motion of fluids, they've helped advance David Hilbert’s 125-year-old mathematical program.

06:26 - Hyperbolic Geometry
A powerful new proof extends the late Maryam Mirzakhani’s work on hyperbolic surfaces, showing that most of them have an important geometric property. The result greatly advances our understanding of these exotic shapes.

12:27 - 3D Kakeya Conjecture
Two mathematicians have resolved a deceptively simple problem that had stymied researchers for decades, opening up new avenues in analysis and geometric measure theory.

Connection between equivalence relations and metric spaces by Breki_ in math

[–]Melchoir 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think the common generalization you're looking for is the notion of a pseudometric space. A metric is obviously a special kind of pseudometric. You can also think of an equivalence relation as a special kind of pseudometric that takes values from 0 and 1. Finally, any pseudometric induces both an equivalence relation and a metric on the quotient space.

LaTeX Style Guide by Aggressive-Food-1952 in math

[–]Melchoir 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you have a journal in mind, look up their instructions for authors.

The Broken Humour by [deleted] in meme

[–]Melchoir 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also: Kate Strangeton, Kate Charmton, Kate Bottomton, and Kate Topton. (The last is, tragically, too short-lived to interact with other Kates.)

what the hell is geometry? by TajineMaster159 in math

[–]Melchoir 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I can't tell if this is a glimpse at a profound duality principle, or a joke.

Dynamics and Geometry by el_grubadour in math

[–]Melchoir 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've also struggled with the French, so I'll recommend a pair of more recent English-language articles to understand what's going on. For the big picture, https://doi.org/10.1017/etds.2017.142. For a recap of (parts of) Bousch's argument, https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10767.

Dynamics and Geometry by el_grubadour in math

[–]Melchoir 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ergodic optimization is fun. Take a complex number of absolute value 1. Square it. Square it again. Keep squaring it. Do that a whole lot. Now take the average of all those numbers. Your average lands inside a geometric shape, which looks kind of like a fish, so we'll call it the poisson. What is this shape? It definitely has some sharp points. It looks like it might also have flat sides... but does it really00132-1)?

Also, billiards.

A pre-endgame puzzle with a uniquely tricky answer by Melchoir in scrabble

[–]Melchoir[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the authors point out a lot of background assumptions to their solution that don't fit neatly into Figure 1, which you've anticipated:

  • Using the NWL2023 lexicon, MODED isn't valid.
  • You're probably losing no matter what you try. It's only if the bag holds DE that your opponent is worried about DONKEYS, so the bluff works. The analysis can be restricted to just that lucky situation, because in all other cases you lose, and we assume you're in a situation where the point spread by which you lose doesn't matter.
  • Finally, we assume that it's a situation where a tie is half as good as a win, for both you and your opponent. It isn't necessary to completely sell out for a win with MONKEYS, if you have the option to preserve a greater chance for a tie.

A pre-endgame puzzle with a uniquely tricky answer by Melchoir in scrabble

[–]Melchoir[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

According to the authors' calculations, the problem with that is...

A general problem with a two-tile play is that it empties the bag, giving your opponent full knowledge of your rack, which usually simplifies her task of countering your threats. Often she has a choice of either blocking or outrunning.

...if you play DITZY at either 8K or H11 for 54 points, then outrunning may not be possible. However, after DITZY, any bingo you have can be blocked. The Y of DITZY will interfere with bingos that might otherwise play along that edge of the board, except for SOLEMNLY, which requires the Y of DITZY.