<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Mathematics Weblog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths</link>
	<description>This site uses &#60;a href="http://sixthform.info/steve/wordpress" target="_blank"&#62;LatexRender&#60;/a&#62; for the mathematics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:21:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Eigenvalues without determinants by Angelos Sphyris</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=160&#038;cpage=1#comment-4240</link>
		<dc:creator>Angelos Sphyris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:21:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=160#comment-4240</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[But how do you know that the vectors v, tv, t2v, t3v, ...., tnv are all distinct to begin with?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But how do you know that the vectors v, tv, t2v, t3v, &#8230;., tnv are all distinct to begin with?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mathematics Summer School in Sirince in Turkey by Mathematics Village (Matematik Köyü) &#124; Densytics</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=164&#038;cpage=1#comment-4239</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathematics Village (Matematik Köyü) &#124; Densytics</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 01:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=164#comment-4239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Those of us involved in mathematics education often whinge about &#8230; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Those of us involved in mathematics education often whinge about &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4230</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I see it, the set of residues of integers mod p^k, k a positive integer, meet the wikipedia criteria to form a commutative ring under residue addition and multiplication mod p^k.
I want to know if this set is a field.
For a ring to be a field, Wikipedia defines the requirement that every non zero element be invertible. In this set, every element that is not a factor of zero is invertible, so it is slightly different from the wikipedia requirement.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I see it, the set of residues of integers mod p^k, k a positive integer, meet the wikipedia criteria to form a commutative ring under residue addition and multiplication mod p^k.<br />
I want to know if this set is a field.<br />
For a ring to be a field, Wikipedia defines the requirement that every non zero element be invertible. In this set, every element that is not a factor of zero is invertible, so it is slightly different from the wikipedia requirement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4228</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 17:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Forget that question Steve. It looks like the binomial theorem for (a+b)^p will handle any type of value ( that I can think of) for a and b, including (cosx+sinx). I am thefore taking it that I can create my factorisation when a+b add to zero.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forget that question Steve. It looks like the binomial theorem for (a+b)^p will handle any type of value ( that I can think of) for a and b, including (cosx+sinx). I am thefore taking it that I can create my factorisation when a+b add to zero.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4227</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:50:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After a marriage and a major house refurbishment I&#039;m back to finish off my problem.
Having claimed victory over the devil, I find myself amusingly playing devil&#039;s advocate to try and find a flaw in my paper. The binomial theorem works for negative integers. Does it work when one of the integers is 0?
My problem is to analyse the sum of two pth powers of integers, p an odd prime. We will do it with residues of these integers modulo p^k. The integers :a:b: are prime to p, but their sum has a factor p, and possibly a facot with higher powers of p.
One stratagem generally employed is to express
the sum as ((a+b)-b)^p +b^p and expand out the first term with the binomial theorem. The b^p terms cancel out leaving a factored expression (a+b)() and you prove the () factor has a single factor p.
Now I can prove what a and b must be for all the various combinations, but my factorisation is of the form (a+b)() where () does not have the factor p. The devil points this out, but I reply I can take my solution :a:b: mod p^k and exponentiate it using the stratagem and the result will be a residue expression mod p^k of (a+b)p(). Is this also valid if a+b=0 mod p^k, i.e. the stratagem forms (0)p() mod p^k? If not, I need to add another section.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After a marriage and a major house refurbishment I&#8217;m back to finish off my problem.<br />
Having claimed victory over the devil, I find myself amusingly playing devil&#8217;s advocate to try and find a flaw in my paper. The binomial theorem works for negative integers. Does it work when one of the integers is 0?<br />
My problem is to analyse the sum of two pth powers of integers, p an odd prime. We will do it with residues of these integers modulo p^k. The integers :a:b: are prime to p, but their sum has a factor p, and possibly a facot with higher powers of p.<br />
One stratagem generally employed is to express<br />
the sum as ((a+b)-b)^p +b^p and expand out the first term with the binomial theorem. The b^p terms cancel out leaving a factored expression (a+b)() and you prove the () factor has a single factor p.<br />
Now I can prove what a and b must be for all the various combinations, but my factorisation is of the form (a+b)() where () does not have the factor p. The devil points this out, but I reply I can take my solution :a:b: mod p^k and exponentiate it using the stratagem and the result will be a residue expression mod p^k of (a+b)p(). Is this also valid if a+b=0 mod p^k, i.e. the stratagem forms (0)p() mod p^k? If not, I need to add another section.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polynomial Division by John P</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=84&#038;cpage=1#comment-4165</link>
		<dc:creator>John P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=84#comment-4165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What about if you want to display polynomial long division in modular.., for example, I am trying to long divide a polynomial in mod7]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about if you want to display polynomial long division in modular.., for example, I am trying to long divide a polynomial in mod7</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4164</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 15:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ignore the last paragraph above. What remains is my argument. (a+b) can only be zero. I don&#039;t want to get into Dr. Faustus and the devil, but in dealing with the devil in mathematics he has two very powerful weapons, infinity and zero. I managed to control infinity, but zero almost beat me. Thanks for being able to bounce ideas off you. Over and out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ignore the last paragraph above. What remains is my argument. (a+b) can only be zero. I don&#8217;t want to get into Dr. Faustus and the devil, but in dealing with the devil in mathematics he has two very powerful weapons, infinity and zero. I managed to control infinity, but zero almost beat me. Thanks for being able to bounce ideas off you. Over and out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4163</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 07:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Needless to say I cannot say a+b is zero mod p^3, so that is not the answer.

My last effort is as follows.
I form a+b residues mod p^2 on a 1:1 basis from other residues mod p^2. I end up with 10 say mod p^2. 5 of them don&#039;t add to zero and can be rejected. The other 5 add to zero and are formed by adding two residues mod p^2. I can factor these as p.(a+b) where a+b is one of the rejected a+b pairs.
Since I am not factorising an integer, but a residues sum, I contend that the (a+b) factor in p.(a+b) is a residue mod p. I cannot make it an (a+b) residue mod p^2, and therefore I maintain  my 1:1 relationship with a+b mod p^2.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Needless to say I cannot say a+b is zero mod p^3, so that is not the answer.</p>
<p>My last effort is as follows.<br />
I form a+b residues mod p^2 on a 1:1 basis from other residues mod p^2. I end up with 10 say mod p^2. 5 of them don&#8217;t add to zero and can be rejected. The other 5 add to zero and are formed by adding two residues mod p^2. I can factor these as p.(a+b) where a+b is one of the rejected a+b pairs.<br />
Since I am not factorising an integer, but a residues sum, I contend that the (a+b) factor in p.(a+b) is a residue mod p. I cannot make it an (a+b) residue mod p^2, and therefore I maintain  my 1:1 relationship with a+b mod p^2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4162</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think I&#039;ve cracked it Steve. I have a certain type (class) of factor a+b,a:b: prime to p, which may be zero at some modular level, but eventually has to be non zero. Dealing at mod p^2 level above I cannot make my conclusion. The answer is to deal at mod p^3 level. From an a+b zero factor mod p^3 I have to derive other a+b type factors, either 0 or of form p(a+b). Analysing these factors mod p^2 it can only be that a+b = 0 mod p^2, which is enough for my problem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I&#8217;ve cracked it Steve. I have a certain type (class) of factor a+b,a:b: prime to p, which may be zero at some modular level, but eventually has to be non zero. Dealing at mod p^2 level above I cannot make my conclusion. The answer is to deal at mod p^3 level. From an a+b zero factor mod p^3 I have to derive other a+b type factors, either 0 or of form p(a+b). Analysing these factors mod p^2 it can only be that a+b = 0 mod p^2, which is enough for my problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on General Comments by Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2&#038;cpage=3#comment-4161</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixthform.info/maths/?p=2#comment-4161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s a bit of a blow Steve. You are saying that a+b can factorise as p.p even though both a and b are prime to p. And don&#039;t you have division by a factor of zero when you say hence c+d=p? I&#039;ll leave it there. Thanks for your response.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a bit of a blow Steve. You are saying that a+b can factorise as p.p even though both a and b are prime to p. And don&#8217;t you have division by a factor of zero when you say hence c+d=p? I&#8217;ll leave it there. Thanks for your response.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
