Problem for February 6th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 6th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 5th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 4th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 3rd from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 2nd from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for February 1st from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for January 31st from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Problem for January 30th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar
Please #help #MathstodonHelp ! --
Why does my recent
https://mathstodon.xyz/@MisterRelativity/115981301450130598
(Jan 30, 2026, 01:50 AM, Last edited Jan 30, 02:01 AM)
not show up in the "Live feeds" https://mathstodon.xyz/public/local
??
What do I have to set/do ??
Thanks!
@LaEsperantaHominoid@mastodon.social wrote (22. Jan. 2026, 06:37): > _I keep hearing "relativity says nothing can travel faster than causality"_ This exact wording you didn't hear from me. ... Damn shame we can no longer search exactly what was to be heard (read) directly from Einstein; as per: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_Papers_Project#(2014-2025)_The_Digital_Einstein_Papers FWIW, I'd sound more like "In #relativity , attention is given to the front of a signal, i.e. to the very first indication which an (sensitive) observer perceived of an event actually having happend in which he didn't take part himself. Whatever a particular observer noticed of a particular event, or causally due to this event, he must have noticed at, or after, having noticed the signal front of this event." > _Well what if just assume it can and do the mathematics anyways?_ Referring to notions + symbols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_structure#Causal_relations we can suitably formalize - (the timelike world line \(\mathcal W\) of) an observer, as a chronologically ordered set of events: \( \forall a, b \in \mathcal W : (((a \ll b) \land \) \( \qquad (not[ b \leq a ])) \lor ((b \ll a) \land (not[ a \leq b ])) \lor (a \equiv b)) \) \( \forall a, b, c \in \mathcal W : (((a \ll b) \land (b \ll c)) \implies (a \ll c)) \) - the event of \(\mathcal W\), which is unique provided it exists at all, which belongs to the signal front of a given event \(\varepsilon\): \( f \in \mathcal W : (f \neq \varepsilon) \land (\varepsilon < f) \land \) \( \qquad (\forall x \in \mathcal W : (\varepsilon < x) \implies ((x \equiv f) \lor (f \ll x))) \) So: "just assuming" \[ \exists y \in \mathcal W : (\exists f) \implies (\varepsilon < y) \land (y \ll f))) \] ... says: the very assumption of \(y\) existing as described is an absurdity.
Problem for January 29th from the 2026 AMS Daily Epsilon of Math Calendar