Prime Numbers, Ramsey Thoery, and Book Reviews
I am almost finished reading “The Man Who Loved Only Numbers”, a biography of mathematician Paul Erdos. “Uncle Paul” was one of the most prolific mathematicians in the 20th century and was relentless in pursuit of finding the truths hidden in numbers. Beyond his personal brilliance, he was also an amazing collaborator and inspiration to an entire generation of mathematicians. When he was just a young man, he was already offering monetary rewards (although usually very small) to people who could proof certain theorems. He always pushed people to “open their mind” to not only finding the solution, but to push themselves to the brink of their own potential. Unlike many other mathematicians who burned-out early in life, Paul continued to conjecture well into his 70s. He spent 19 hours a day with his numbers, calling (and traveling to) colleagues all around the world. Math was his life and he had almost no material possessions (he had two small suitcases and gave his money to charities or as prizes for proofs). And his math was pure and simple. It was math that anyone could understand, but brilliant scholars would spend lifetimes studying. For example, is there a formula (or even a pattern) to calculate prime numbers (number that are only divisible by 1 and themselves). A simple question that no one seems to be able to answer.
Since I was little, I had an affinity for numbers, although calculators and computers have dulled my skills. However, I still believe in a purity of math that exists on a metaphysical plane beyond our own existence. I also find math truly beautiful at times. For example, if you wanted to add up all the number from 1 to any number (n), then you just use the formula: (n*(n+1))/2. Go ahead and try it for any number and now imagine having to have to add 1+2+3+4….n and how ugly that is.
I am going to try to teach Molly pure math and logic when it is time. I hope she will like the challenge, but I know that it will help to understand math when she goes to school. When I was little I never needed to “learn” how to multiply, divide, calculate exponents, or do square roots; as all of them are just variations on 1+1 (if 1+1 is “understood” and not just memorized). Perhaps in a few years I will take a big poster board and write the numbers from 1 to 100 and every night Molly can either circle a prime number or cross off a composite number (non-prime). I want to teach her how logic (if A then B; if B then C; thus A then C) is at the core of geometry, algebra, and calculus (and taken a step further to physics and chemistry). Like Paul Erdos, I will help Molly when she needs help and give her problems I know she can solve if she thinks about it. And hopefully she figure out math “tricks” on her own (like how to easily multiple 49*50 or 87*11 or to calculate a tip after dinner).
Back to the Paul Erdos biography, it was written somewhat haphazardly, often drifting off to topics unrelated to Erdos (although always related to math). It also gives some very interesting details on the history of certain mathematical ideas, many dating back hundreds if not thousands of years. The math in the book is very simple and anyone with a high school education would understand 90% of it (the book is more on the philosophy of math as opposes to its application). To be objective, I would give the book a B; however, I enjoyed it very much. It is a quick read and I suggest it to anyone who either hates or loves numbers.
Since I was little, I had an affinity for numbers, although calculators and computers have dulled my skills. However, I still believe in a purity of math that exists on a metaphysical plane beyond our own existence. I also find math truly beautiful at times. For example, if you wanted to add up all the number from 1 to any number (n), then you just use the formula: (n*(n+1))/2. Go ahead and try it for any number and now imagine having to have to add 1+2+3+4….n and how ugly that is.
I am going to try to teach Molly pure math and logic when it is time. I hope she will like the challenge, but I know that it will help to understand math when she goes to school. When I was little I never needed to “learn” how to multiply, divide, calculate exponents, or do square roots; as all of them are just variations on 1+1 (if 1+1 is “understood” and not just memorized). Perhaps in a few years I will take a big poster board and write the numbers from 1 to 100 and every night Molly can either circle a prime number or cross off a composite number (non-prime). I want to teach her how logic (if A then B; if B then C; thus A then C) is at the core of geometry, algebra, and calculus (and taken a step further to physics and chemistry). Like Paul Erdos, I will help Molly when she needs help and give her problems I know she can solve if she thinks about it. And hopefully she figure out math “tricks” on her own (like how to easily multiple 49*50 or 87*11 or to calculate a tip after dinner).
Back to the Paul Erdos biography, it was written somewhat haphazardly, often drifting off to topics unrelated to Erdos (although always related to math). It also gives some very interesting details on the history of certain mathematical ideas, many dating back hundreds if not thousands of years. The math in the book is very simple and anyone with a high school education would understand 90% of it (the book is more on the philosophy of math as opposes to its application). To be objective, I would give the book a B; however, I enjoyed it very much. It is a quick read and I suggest it to anyone who either hates or loves numbers.
Comments