Intuition behind existence of mixed volumes?Intuition Behind Geometric MeansIntuition behind euler's formulaIntuition behind topological spacesIntuition behind Fourier coefficientsIntuition behind symmetric and antisymmetric tensorsPolarization formula.Intuition behind combinatorics problems?Intuition behind Vacuous proofsIntuition behind mild solutionIntuition behind Algebra

Why is it that I can sometimes guess the next note?

Is there a RAID 0 Equivalent for RAM?

Did the UK lift the requirement for registering SIM cards?

How do I tell my boss that I'm quitting soon, especially given that a colleague just left this week

Can I say "fingers" when referring to toes?

What is Cash Advance APR?

Confused about Cramer-Rao lower bound and CLT

Is a Java collection guaranteed to be in a valid, usable state after a ConcurrentModificationException?

Which Article Helped Get Rid of Technobabble in RPGs?

Find the next value of this number series

How to convince somebody that he is fit for something else, but not this job?

Is it ethical to recieve stipend after publishing enough papers?

Why do Radio Buttons not fill the entire outer circle?

Permission on Database

awk assign to multiple variables at once

Why the "ls" command is showing the permissions of files in a FAT32 partition?

Is there any evidence that Cleopatra and Caesarion considered fleeing to India to escape the Romans?

Multiplicative persistence

What kind of floor tile is this?

Creating two special characters

What features enable the Su-25 Frogfoot to operate with such a wide variety of fuels?

Circuit Analysis: Obtaining Close Loop OP - AMP Transfer function

What is the English pronunciation of "pain au chocolat"?

What does Apple's new App Store requirement mean



Intuition behind existence of mixed volumes?


Intuition Behind Geometric MeansIntuition behind euler's formulaIntuition behind topological spacesIntuition behind Fourier coefficientsIntuition behind symmetric and antisymmetric tensorsPolarization formula.Intuition behind combinatorics problems?Intuition behind Vacuous proofsIntuition behind mild solutionIntuition behind Algebra













2












$begingroup$


Consider "Volume" as a function from set of $d$-dimensional convex bodies to real numbers. This function is homogeneous of degree $d$ (under rescalings of the convex bodies). Minkowski's theorem asserts that this function is in fact the restriction of a symmetric multilinear (with respect to Minkowski addition) function on $d$-tuples of convex bodies called "mixed volume".



This is akin to the relation between a quadratic form and corresponding bilinear form, with polarization identity (generalized to $d$-linear case) as usual implying that if such mixed volume function exists it is unique (see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/71952/do-the-elementary-properties-of-mixed-volume-characterize-it-uniquely/71980#71980 for example.)



Of course an arbitrary homogeneous function of degree $d$ on a vector space is not a homogeneous polynomial, and so more likely than not it does not come from restricting a multilinear symmetric form.



Why does volume? I other words, why should mixed volumes exist?



Of course it's a theorem they do, but the proofs I've seen proceed by induction on dimension and I have not been able to extract any intuition from them.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    Consider "Volume" as a function from set of $d$-dimensional convex bodies to real numbers. This function is homogeneous of degree $d$ (under rescalings of the convex bodies). Minkowski's theorem asserts that this function is in fact the restriction of a symmetric multilinear (with respect to Minkowski addition) function on $d$-tuples of convex bodies called "mixed volume".



    This is akin to the relation between a quadratic form and corresponding bilinear form, with polarization identity (generalized to $d$-linear case) as usual implying that if such mixed volume function exists it is unique (see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/71952/do-the-elementary-properties-of-mixed-volume-characterize-it-uniquely/71980#71980 for example.)



    Of course an arbitrary homogeneous function of degree $d$ on a vector space is not a homogeneous polynomial, and so more likely than not it does not come from restricting a multilinear symmetric form.



    Why does volume? I other words, why should mixed volumes exist?



    Of course it's a theorem they do, but the proofs I've seen proceed by induction on dimension and I have not been able to extract any intuition from them.










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2


      1



      $begingroup$


      Consider "Volume" as a function from set of $d$-dimensional convex bodies to real numbers. This function is homogeneous of degree $d$ (under rescalings of the convex bodies). Minkowski's theorem asserts that this function is in fact the restriction of a symmetric multilinear (with respect to Minkowski addition) function on $d$-tuples of convex bodies called "mixed volume".



      This is akin to the relation between a quadratic form and corresponding bilinear form, with polarization identity (generalized to $d$-linear case) as usual implying that if such mixed volume function exists it is unique (see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/71952/do-the-elementary-properties-of-mixed-volume-characterize-it-uniquely/71980#71980 for example.)



      Of course an arbitrary homogeneous function of degree $d$ on a vector space is not a homogeneous polynomial, and so more likely than not it does not come from restricting a multilinear symmetric form.



      Why does volume? I other words, why should mixed volumes exist?



      Of course it's a theorem they do, but the proofs I've seen proceed by induction on dimension and I have not been able to extract any intuition from them.










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Consider "Volume" as a function from set of $d$-dimensional convex bodies to real numbers. This function is homogeneous of degree $d$ (under rescalings of the convex bodies). Minkowski's theorem asserts that this function is in fact the restriction of a symmetric multilinear (with respect to Minkowski addition) function on $d$-tuples of convex bodies called "mixed volume".



      This is akin to the relation between a quadratic form and corresponding bilinear form, with polarization identity (generalized to $d$-linear case) as usual implying that if such mixed volume function exists it is unique (see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/71952/do-the-elementary-properties-of-mixed-volume-characterize-it-uniquely/71980#71980 for example.)



      Of course an arbitrary homogeneous function of degree $d$ on a vector space is not a homogeneous polynomial, and so more likely than not it does not come from restricting a multilinear symmetric form.



      Why does volume? I other words, why should mixed volumes exist?



      Of course it's a theorem they do, but the proofs I've seen proceed by induction on dimension and I have not been able to extract any intuition from them.







      intuition multilinear-algebra convex-geometry






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Mar 14 at 15:12









      MaxMax

      4,3621326




      4,3621326




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0












          $begingroup$

          After some literature search, I found two things:



          1) This "polynomial" perspective is well-developed in Hörmander's book "Notions of Convexity". In the Appendix A Hörmander discusses what it means for a function on (an open convex cone in) a vector space to be a polynomial (in a way which for finite dimensional vector spaces is equivalent to being polynomial in some, hence every, basis) -- his definition is that the function becomes a univariate polynomial when restricted to any line (not necessarily through the origin). He discusses how such functions are obtained from multilinear forms by polarization, and proves Proposition A.1 which in context of convex geometry establishes equivalence of concavity of $Vol^1/d$, the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, and the isoperimetric inequality, among other things.



          In the main text (p. 75) he embeds (by considering support functions) the cone of compact convex sets in $mathbbR^d$ into the vector space of continuous function functions on the dual $(mathbbR^d)^*$, thus producing a vector space in which one can state this polynomiality (this is a nice concrete version of taking the Grothendieck group of the monoid of compact convex sets under Minkowski sum).



          More importantly for this question, Hörmander's proof of Minkowski's theorem, while still inductive on dimension, made it clearer (to me) why volume is polynomial. After reducing to the case of polyhedra, we are reduced to the following observation: the volume of a polyhedron is a sum of volumes of pyramids from an interior point to its faces (or in fact from any point, but we would then need to take oriented volumes). The pyramids participating in this sum for the polytope $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ have the height $lambda_1 h_1 +lambda_2 h_2$ which is (degree 1) polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ and the "area of the base" is a degree $d-1$ polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ by inductive hypothesis. Thus each "pyramid volume" is a degree $d$ polynomial, and hence so is the volume itself.



          I think if one follows through the induction one should get a kind of "orthogonal barycentric subdivision" of $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ with each simplex constructed from the simplexes and altitudes of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$ in the way that makes their volumes a product of $d$ linear polynomials in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$.



          2) The combinatorics describing the details of the "following through the induction" above should be essentially described by what is called "mixed subdivision" of the Minkowski sum, which also explains why volume of convex sets is polynomial. Roughly, one takes the join of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$, embedded into $mathbbR^d+1$ (in this context this is called "Cayley embedding"), triangulates that and projects to the original space. One obtains a triangulation of the Minkowski sum via "mixed simplexes"(that is projections of joins of simplexes in triangulations of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$), each of which clearly has volume which is polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$; thus the whole Minkowski sum has volume which is polynomial.



          This is described in detail in chapter 9 of "Trinagulations" book of De Loera, Rambau, and Santos.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3148126%2fintuition-behind-existence-of-mixed-volumes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0












            $begingroup$

            After some literature search, I found two things:



            1) This "polynomial" perspective is well-developed in Hörmander's book "Notions of Convexity". In the Appendix A Hörmander discusses what it means for a function on (an open convex cone in) a vector space to be a polynomial (in a way which for finite dimensional vector spaces is equivalent to being polynomial in some, hence every, basis) -- his definition is that the function becomes a univariate polynomial when restricted to any line (not necessarily through the origin). He discusses how such functions are obtained from multilinear forms by polarization, and proves Proposition A.1 which in context of convex geometry establishes equivalence of concavity of $Vol^1/d$, the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, and the isoperimetric inequality, among other things.



            In the main text (p. 75) he embeds (by considering support functions) the cone of compact convex sets in $mathbbR^d$ into the vector space of continuous function functions on the dual $(mathbbR^d)^*$, thus producing a vector space in which one can state this polynomiality (this is a nice concrete version of taking the Grothendieck group of the monoid of compact convex sets under Minkowski sum).



            More importantly for this question, Hörmander's proof of Minkowski's theorem, while still inductive on dimension, made it clearer (to me) why volume is polynomial. After reducing to the case of polyhedra, we are reduced to the following observation: the volume of a polyhedron is a sum of volumes of pyramids from an interior point to its faces (or in fact from any point, but we would then need to take oriented volumes). The pyramids participating in this sum for the polytope $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ have the height $lambda_1 h_1 +lambda_2 h_2$ which is (degree 1) polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ and the "area of the base" is a degree $d-1$ polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ by inductive hypothesis. Thus each "pyramid volume" is a degree $d$ polynomial, and hence so is the volume itself.



            I think if one follows through the induction one should get a kind of "orthogonal barycentric subdivision" of $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ with each simplex constructed from the simplexes and altitudes of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$ in the way that makes their volumes a product of $d$ linear polynomials in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$.



            2) The combinatorics describing the details of the "following through the induction" above should be essentially described by what is called "mixed subdivision" of the Minkowski sum, which also explains why volume of convex sets is polynomial. Roughly, one takes the join of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$, embedded into $mathbbR^d+1$ (in this context this is called "Cayley embedding"), triangulates that and projects to the original space. One obtains a triangulation of the Minkowski sum via "mixed simplexes"(that is projections of joins of simplexes in triangulations of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$), each of which clearly has volume which is polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$; thus the whole Minkowski sum has volume which is polynomial.



            This is described in detail in chapter 9 of "Trinagulations" book of De Loera, Rambau, and Santos.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$

















              0












              $begingroup$

              After some literature search, I found two things:



              1) This "polynomial" perspective is well-developed in Hörmander's book "Notions of Convexity". In the Appendix A Hörmander discusses what it means for a function on (an open convex cone in) a vector space to be a polynomial (in a way which for finite dimensional vector spaces is equivalent to being polynomial in some, hence every, basis) -- his definition is that the function becomes a univariate polynomial when restricted to any line (not necessarily through the origin). He discusses how such functions are obtained from multilinear forms by polarization, and proves Proposition A.1 which in context of convex geometry establishes equivalence of concavity of $Vol^1/d$, the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, and the isoperimetric inequality, among other things.



              In the main text (p. 75) he embeds (by considering support functions) the cone of compact convex sets in $mathbbR^d$ into the vector space of continuous function functions on the dual $(mathbbR^d)^*$, thus producing a vector space in which one can state this polynomiality (this is a nice concrete version of taking the Grothendieck group of the monoid of compact convex sets under Minkowski sum).



              More importantly for this question, Hörmander's proof of Minkowski's theorem, while still inductive on dimension, made it clearer (to me) why volume is polynomial. After reducing to the case of polyhedra, we are reduced to the following observation: the volume of a polyhedron is a sum of volumes of pyramids from an interior point to its faces (or in fact from any point, but we would then need to take oriented volumes). The pyramids participating in this sum for the polytope $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ have the height $lambda_1 h_1 +lambda_2 h_2$ which is (degree 1) polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ and the "area of the base" is a degree $d-1$ polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ by inductive hypothesis. Thus each "pyramid volume" is a degree $d$ polynomial, and hence so is the volume itself.



              I think if one follows through the induction one should get a kind of "orthogonal barycentric subdivision" of $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ with each simplex constructed from the simplexes and altitudes of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$ in the way that makes their volumes a product of $d$ linear polynomials in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$.



              2) The combinatorics describing the details of the "following through the induction" above should be essentially described by what is called "mixed subdivision" of the Minkowski sum, which also explains why volume of convex sets is polynomial. Roughly, one takes the join of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$, embedded into $mathbbR^d+1$ (in this context this is called "Cayley embedding"), triangulates that and projects to the original space. One obtains a triangulation of the Minkowski sum via "mixed simplexes"(that is projections of joins of simplexes in triangulations of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$), each of which clearly has volume which is polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$; thus the whole Minkowski sum has volume which is polynomial.



              This is described in detail in chapter 9 of "Trinagulations" book of De Loera, Rambau, and Santos.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$















                0












                0








                0





                $begingroup$

                After some literature search, I found two things:



                1) This "polynomial" perspective is well-developed in Hörmander's book "Notions of Convexity". In the Appendix A Hörmander discusses what it means for a function on (an open convex cone in) a vector space to be a polynomial (in a way which for finite dimensional vector spaces is equivalent to being polynomial in some, hence every, basis) -- his definition is that the function becomes a univariate polynomial when restricted to any line (not necessarily through the origin). He discusses how such functions are obtained from multilinear forms by polarization, and proves Proposition A.1 which in context of convex geometry establishes equivalence of concavity of $Vol^1/d$, the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, and the isoperimetric inequality, among other things.



                In the main text (p. 75) he embeds (by considering support functions) the cone of compact convex sets in $mathbbR^d$ into the vector space of continuous function functions on the dual $(mathbbR^d)^*$, thus producing a vector space in which one can state this polynomiality (this is a nice concrete version of taking the Grothendieck group of the monoid of compact convex sets under Minkowski sum).



                More importantly for this question, Hörmander's proof of Minkowski's theorem, while still inductive on dimension, made it clearer (to me) why volume is polynomial. After reducing to the case of polyhedra, we are reduced to the following observation: the volume of a polyhedron is a sum of volumes of pyramids from an interior point to its faces (or in fact from any point, but we would then need to take oriented volumes). The pyramids participating in this sum for the polytope $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ have the height $lambda_1 h_1 +lambda_2 h_2$ which is (degree 1) polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ and the "area of the base" is a degree $d-1$ polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ by inductive hypothesis. Thus each "pyramid volume" is a degree $d$ polynomial, and hence so is the volume itself.



                I think if one follows through the induction one should get a kind of "orthogonal barycentric subdivision" of $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ with each simplex constructed from the simplexes and altitudes of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$ in the way that makes their volumes a product of $d$ linear polynomials in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$.



                2) The combinatorics describing the details of the "following through the induction" above should be essentially described by what is called "mixed subdivision" of the Minkowski sum, which also explains why volume of convex sets is polynomial. Roughly, one takes the join of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$, embedded into $mathbbR^d+1$ (in this context this is called "Cayley embedding"), triangulates that and projects to the original space. One obtains a triangulation of the Minkowski sum via "mixed simplexes"(that is projections of joins of simplexes in triangulations of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$), each of which clearly has volume which is polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$; thus the whole Minkowski sum has volume which is polynomial.



                This is described in detail in chapter 9 of "Trinagulations" book of De Loera, Rambau, and Santos.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                After some literature search, I found two things:



                1) This "polynomial" perspective is well-developed in Hörmander's book "Notions of Convexity". In the Appendix A Hörmander discusses what it means for a function on (an open convex cone in) a vector space to be a polynomial (in a way which for finite dimensional vector spaces is equivalent to being polynomial in some, hence every, basis) -- his definition is that the function becomes a univariate polynomial when restricted to any line (not necessarily through the origin). He discusses how such functions are obtained from multilinear forms by polarization, and proves Proposition A.1 which in context of convex geometry establishes equivalence of concavity of $Vol^1/d$, the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, and the isoperimetric inequality, among other things.



                In the main text (p. 75) he embeds (by considering support functions) the cone of compact convex sets in $mathbbR^d$ into the vector space of continuous function functions on the dual $(mathbbR^d)^*$, thus producing a vector space in which one can state this polynomiality (this is a nice concrete version of taking the Grothendieck group of the monoid of compact convex sets under Minkowski sum).



                More importantly for this question, Hörmander's proof of Minkowski's theorem, while still inductive on dimension, made it clearer (to me) why volume is polynomial. After reducing to the case of polyhedra, we are reduced to the following observation: the volume of a polyhedron is a sum of volumes of pyramids from an interior point to its faces (or in fact from any point, but we would then need to take oriented volumes). The pyramids participating in this sum for the polytope $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ have the height $lambda_1 h_1 +lambda_2 h_2$ which is (degree 1) polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ and the "area of the base" is a degree $d-1$ polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$ by inductive hypothesis. Thus each "pyramid volume" is a degree $d$ polynomial, and hence so is the volume itself.



                I think if one follows through the induction one should get a kind of "orthogonal barycentric subdivision" of $lambda_1 K_1 +lambda_2 K_2$ with each simplex constructed from the simplexes and altitudes of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$ in the way that makes their volumes a product of $d$ linear polynomials in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$.



                2) The combinatorics describing the details of the "following through the induction" above should be essentially described by what is called "mixed subdivision" of the Minkowski sum, which also explains why volume of convex sets is polynomial. Roughly, one takes the join of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$, embedded into $mathbbR^d+1$ (in this context this is called "Cayley embedding"), triangulates that and projects to the original space. One obtains a triangulation of the Minkowski sum via "mixed simplexes"(that is projections of joins of simplexes in triangulations of $lambda_1 K_1$ and $lambda_2 K_2$), each of which clearly has volume which is polynomial in $(lambda_1, lambda_2)$; thus the whole Minkowski sum has volume which is polynomial.



                This is described in detail in chapter 9 of "Trinagulations" book of De Loera, Rambau, and Santos.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 17 at 12:44

























                answered Mar 15 at 17:29









                MaxMax

                4,3621326




                4,3621326



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3148126%2fintuition-behind-existence-of-mixed-volumes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Moe incest case Sentencing See also References Navigation menu"'Australian Josef Fritzl' fathered four children by daughter""Small town recoils in horror at 'Australian Fritzl' incest case""Victorian rape allegations echo Fritzl case - Just In (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)""Incest father jailed for 22 years""'Australian Fritzl' sentenced to 22 years in prison for abusing daughter for three decades""RSJ v The Queen"

                    Who is our nearest planetary neighbor, on average?Santa Claus flies to the South PoleSeven Spheres of Unequal Mass, a weighing problem with a twistDescribe a large integerFast Mental Calculation of $7.5^7$Math in Space (without the help of celebrities)Find the value of $bigstar$: Puzzle 8 - InequalityWho drinks beer while running anyway?A Crucial DeliveryRanking And AverageHow long will my money last at roulette?

                    Daza language Contents Vocabulary Phonology References External links Navigation menudaza1242Daza"Dazaga"eeee178086576