a friend gave me the statement of a top-secret combinatorics theorem he proved. can't share the deets but it's so elementary i couldn't believe it wasn't already done or a special case of something else. been fudging my way through a proof all weekend
― flopson, Monday, 4 May 2015 21:39 (nine years ago) link
gotta check those untranslated soviet math textbooks for those things iirc
― jennifer islam (silby), Tuesday, 5 May 2015 01:55 (nine years ago) link
I never did contest math in HS and I'm still only at best a fake fake mathematician (i.e. a programmer who actually enjoyed theoretical CS classes) so Putnam problems just seem unattainable to me
― jennifer islam (silby), Tuesday, 5 May 2015 02:00 (nine years ago) link
there was a putnam prep class at my undergrad you could sit in on, mostly just watching in disbelief as the prof, a hyper-intense russian graph theorist, crushed every problem in a matter of seconds
― flopson, Tuesday, 5 May 2015 02:17 (nine years ago) link
http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/emat6680.f99/challen/proof/proof.html
― the late great, Wednesday, 6 May 2015 19:40 (eight years ago) link
Proof by calculus: "This proof requires calculus, so we'll skip it."
otm
― jennifer islam (silby), Wednesday, 6 May 2015 19:49 (eight years ago) link
Archimedes frowns.
hint to flopson: use stereographic projection.
― Thank You For Talking Machine Chemirocha (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 7 May 2015 13:25 (eight years ago) link
Thanks to caek's post here: academic language is often purposely obfuscated I read Timothy Gower's Mathematics: A Very Short Introduction a while back, which blew my mind as some kind of masterpiece of popularization, which eventually led me to the Princeton Companion To Mathematics which he addeds and sort of takes the same spirit and enlarges it a thousand-fold with tons of useful explanations of advanced mathematical subjects without diverging into the usual bifurcation of either oversimplification + dodgy metaphors or too much technical detail.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 16:41 (eight years ago) link
Of course, it is kind of a different thing not a popularization.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 16:43 (eight years ago) link
Well that's now on my mental wishlist
― jennifer islam (silby), Saturday, 16 May 2015 18:32 (eight years ago) link
Maybe you are near a library that has it?
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 18:41 (eight years ago) link
lol the first copy i stole from the internet still has editorial markup in its margins
PUP: Tim wouldlike to keep‘brackets’ as evenhe, as amathematician,would say‘brackets’ ratherthan the moreformal‘parentheses’. OK?
― j., Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:03 (eight years ago) link
i never call them parentheses in math
― flopson, Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:15 (eight years ago) link
In addition to referring to the class of all types of brackets, the unqualified word bracket is most commonly used to refer to a specific type of bracket. In modern American usage this is usually the square bracket and in modern British usage this is usually the parenthesis.
― j., Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:18 (eight years ago) link
"addeds" should be "edited" of course.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:26 (eight years ago) link
speaking of popular mathematics, has anybody read courant's "what is mathematics?"
my dad swears by it, was wondering if anybody here could give it a thumbs up or down
― the late great, Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:42 (eight years ago) link
for comparison, last two pop math books i read were morris kline's "mathematics for the non-mathematician" and stewart's "concepts of modern mathematics" (ian, not james)
― the late great, Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:46 (eight years ago) link
Mega thumbs up for Courant and Robbins, and for Gowers. Not for Kline or Stewart.
― droit au butt (Euler), Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:48 (eight years ago) link
Wazzabout Geometry and the Imagination, Hilbert and Cohn-Vossen?
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:52 (eight years ago) link
obv a classic
― droit au butt (Euler), Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:55 (eight years ago) link
i enjoyed both kline and stewart, though i ultimately felt stewart lacked depth. kline was a little dry, i guess
― the late great, Saturday, 16 May 2015 19:57 (eight years ago) link
They're not super well-informed, that's all.
You might enjoy Plato's Ghost?
― droit au butt (Euler), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:00 (eight years ago) link
damn, too late for a PIDMAS joke
― ☂ (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:01 (eight years ago) link
what do you mean, euler?
"plato's ghost" sounds great!
― the late great, Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:03 (eight years ago) link
Wow, lot's of rave reviews for Plato's Ghost on Amazon, including yours.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:04 (eight years ago) link
I just mean that Kline esp didn't know his stuff very well.
Plato's Ghost is fun! but haha a uh friend of mine is quoted about it by the publisher on the Amazon page. positive quote
― droit au butt (Euler), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:07 (eight years ago) link
xp eek
Hm. NYPL has Plato' Ghost but it is completely different book.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:08 (eight years ago) link
Plato' Ghost must haunt me now
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:10 (eight years ago) link
my kids thought it was a scary book when they were littler. we had to hide it
― droit au butt (Euler), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:11 (eight years ago) link
that VSI is kind of a miracle. every other VSI (including the cosmology one) is shoddy or cursory or biased or otherwise weird. but that is afaict an effective, readable and serious introduction to professional higher mathematics. and it's like 50 pages. i should definitely take a look at his princeton companion.
the more traditional NPR pop maths book i liked most recently (i.e. published in the last 10 years) was zero: biography of a dangerous idea. good book.
― 𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:21 (eight years ago) link
Some are better than others. The one on Galileo has a strange angle to push, one on Newton is pretty good I think.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 20:44 (eight years ago) link
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, May 16, 2015 11:41 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
work for UW now so I can abuse my library privileges for it I guess.
― jennifer islam (silby), Saturday, 16 May 2015 22:30 (eight years ago) link
Newton one was written by head of the Newton Project.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 22:32 (eight years ago) link
Author of Galileo book was no slouch either, although now I can see the book was not written to be a short course.
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 16 May 2015 22:38 (eight years ago) link
Of the little pop math I've read recently, I liked Ekeland's "Mathematics and the Unexpected".
― o. nate, Sunday, 17 May 2015 01:39 (eight years ago) link
I just read the VSI on antisemitism and it was very weird, more a history of the Holocaust than anything, but it had a couple of outstanding chapters that made it worthwhile. gonna read the german philosophy volume next.
that was just about the VSI series. obligatory math content: Mathematics Under the Nazis by Sanford Segal is fascinating
― droit au butt (Euler), Sunday, 17 May 2015 09:48 (eight years ago) link
the german philosophy one is just a reprint of an old scruton book iirc, would give it a pass
― j., Sunday, 17 May 2015 13:37 (eight years ago) link
was looking at one by Andrew Bowie ?
― droit au butt (Euler), Sunday, 17 May 2015 14:03 (eight years ago) link
who I don't know, but I want some guidance on where to start with german idealism re. the rise of German anti-semitism in particular
― droit au butt (Euler), Sunday, 17 May 2015 14:04 (eight years ago) link
oh, it seems they've replaced the old one i read then
― j., Sunday, 17 May 2015 14:52 (eight years ago) link
Have always seen those Morris Kline books about, never read one. This other guy Carl B. Boyer looks like he might be good though
― Lemmy Cauchemar (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 17 May 2015 15:47 (eight years ago) link
RIP John Nash.
― Proclus Hiriam (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 24 May 2015 18:14 (eight years ago) link
at least they went together, that's kind of cool i guess
― the late great, Monday, 25 May 2015 01:44 (eight years ago) link
not a nice way to go though
apparently gromov said that john nash's work in differential geometry was infinitely more important than the game theory stuff
got some great riddles for y'all
(1) name a function f: Z->Z such that f(f(x)) = -x for all x in Z. note that f(x) = i*x is not an answer because it doesn't map Z to Z. (hint: there are infinitely many solutions)
(2.a) (easy) consider a game where you flip coins. i give you a dollar when it comes up heads and take away a dollar when it comes up tails. for fixed n, how many sequences are there such that you end the game with zero dollars?(2.b) (hard) how many sequences are there such that you end with zero dollars, but never have negative dollars?(2.c) (hard) call a peak the largest number of dollars accumulated over the course of the game. for example, if n=4 and you flip HHTT, the peak is two. if you flip HTHT, the peak is 1, attained twice. prove that exactly half of all sequences such that you end with zero dollars attain their peak exactly once.
you should all be able to figure out (1) and (2.a). i'll let you torture yourselves for a week or so then post the solutions to (2.b) and (2.c)
― flopson, Wednesday, 3 June 2015 22:08 (eight years ago) link
everybody on earth says this, not just gromov
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Wednesday, 3 June 2015 22:32 (eight years ago) link
His work on complexity would’ve likely been even more important than his Riemannian manifold or game theoretic work if it were declassified in a timely manner. But I’m biased, obviously.
― Allen (etaeoe), Wednesday, 3 June 2015 23:23 (eight years ago) link
Thanks for the problems flopson. I’ll play with these over the weekend.
― Allen (etaeoe), Wednesday, 3 June 2015 23:26 (eight years ago) link
can someone tell me how big a deal this actually is? There was like a brief period four years ago where I was maybe almost trying to get some clue about what the scope and aim of studying foundations is and also a brief tutorial in formal verification and so like what is happening here
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150519-will-computers-redefine-the-roots-of-math/
― jennifer islam (silby), Wednesday, 10 June 2015 05:56 (eight years ago) link