Mathman! Mathman!

[Borachio]

@ SS-18 I'd go with Complex Analysis. I understand that can seriously fry brains.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Which maths are the most useful for killing people?

The ones that apply to ballistics.

Serious question here: PS, what is your opinion on the song "Mandelbrot Set" by Jonathan Coulton?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Not heard it, may google it later, but am on beer #7.

 

[G-Max]

Haha, no. You can't do anything meaningful with geometry without "screwing with numbers" anyway.

Who are you to decide what is "meaningful" and what isn't?

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Who are you to decide what is "meaningful" and what isn't?

He's a German. They're, like, the OWNERS of math.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

The more maths you do, the less numbers appear. We only really see 0, 1, 2, i, e and pi on a regular basis. And infinity.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

the more maths you do, the less numbers appear. We only really see 0, 1, 2, i, e and pi on a regular basis. And infinity.

ahem! γ = 0.5772156649...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Is that the Euler-Mascheroni constant? That doesn't turn up much.

 

[G-Max]

aforementioned maths puzzle:

What fraction of this regular octagon is shaded?

over nine thousaaaaandths!

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

But I like it.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

over nine thousaaaaandths!

The correct answer is to take the picture, draw a big arrow towards the shaded area, and say "that much".

 

[ParadigmShifter]

But I like it.

I forget the definition, I thought it was 1/ln(2). It turns up a fair bit. Why do you like it?

EDIT: Obviously it isn't 1/ln(2), otherwise that's what we would call it

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

I forget the definition, I thought it was 1/ln(2). It turns up a fair bit. Why do you like it?

Well to start with, it's got a fair bit of connection to two of my favorite functions, Gamma(z) and Zeta(z)⁽¹⁾. It also looks nice on paper, there's still a lot of mystery about it, and it has a nice definition.

The definition:



(1): The Euler-Mascheroni constant happens to be the negative of Gamma'(1), or in other words, the slope of the Gamma function at 1 is -γ. It also appears in just about every term of the Zeta function's Taylor series.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Gamma function sucks anyway. Why is Gamma(z) = (z-1)!

It should be called z! (EDIT: Well, Gamma(z+1) should be called z!).

 

[Truronian]

over nine thousaaaaandths!

That's a bound, not a value.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Gamma function sucks anyway. Why is Gamma(z) = (z-1)!

It should be called z!

I'm glad you mention that. The Riemann Zeta book I have doesn't use Gamma(z) at all, but what Euler used, Pi(z) (not pi(z), Pi(z)), which is equal to z!.

 

[G-Max]

That's a bound, not a value.

But the answer is within that bound

 

[_random_]

But in geometry, you can actually see what you're doing. If you want to prove that dodecahedra cannot tesselate space, and you don't want to screw around with numbers, you can just glue a bunch of dodecahedra together. That's over nine thousand times better than trying to calculate when two trains will collide.

Gluing a bunch of dodecahedra sounds like an assload of difficult work compared to figuring out a couple of rates.

 

[G-Max]

You obviously never got high with a bunch of D&D nerds in a craft shop. That was probably the only time when pipe cleaners have actually been used for cleaning pipes...

 

[azzaman333]

You obviously never got high with a bunch of D&D nerds in a craft shop. That was probably the only time when pipe cleaners have actually been used for cleaning pipes...

Most people have better things to do with their time.