Live data from Hacker News

An Infinitely Large Napkin

web.evanchen.cc

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#11

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students. I majored in math in college, and yet there were things which I could not decipher in the first few pages of chapter 1. For example, on page 43, what is "nonzero residues modulo p"? I guess you start with something, divide by p, and get a remainder, or residue. But what is that something? Going back to page 41, I see the hint that Z is the set of integers. I vague…

I would clarify and say that it's aimed at high school students with a serious thirst for competition math and math in general, Evan hangs around a lot (or at least he used to) on the Art of Problem Solving forums, and I think it's these students who spend their day pouring over math discussions, and math problems, that the book is aimed at.

These students would already know that Z is the set of integers, and if they didn't I don't think it would be a deterrent to pouring over the book.

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#12
post #4

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students. I majored in math in college, and yet there were things which I could not decipher in the first few pages of chapter 1. For example, on page 43, what is "nonzero residues modulo p"? I guess you start with something, divide by p, and get a remainder, or residue. But what is that something? Going back to page 41, I see the hint that Z is the set of integers. I vague…

The fact that Z denotes the set of integers is a sort of mathwide standard. It comes up a lot (number theory, group theory) Did you major in some specific area of maths? Or is it just the span of years between?

"The fact that Z denotes the set of integers is a sort of mathwide standard."

I'm pretty sure I saw that in my high school in the early 90s, but it was a one-off event where we discussed ℕ, ℝ, ℤ, and ℚ, but we never used them for anything. I'm sitting here trying to remember our high-school set theory (which is getting cognitive interference from my college training on the topic), but my memory is claiming I either never had to write {x | x ∃ ℤ} in high school, or if I ever did, we blipped over it really quickly.

High school math generally implicitly takes place in "casual ℝ". I call it casual because the only time it even gets close to really hammering on the characteristics of real numbers is in the limit discussion. I certainly never heard "Dedekind cut" in high school.

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#13

Adding this here as it may be of related interest for those who enjoyed the massive math cheat sheet on the front page recently. Evan Chen, a math student at MIT, wrote up what would be considered field notes for higher mathematics. The full PDF is here[1], complete with a dependency graph showing what you need to know before reading any particular section. ____________ 1. https://usamo.files.wordpress.com/2019/02/na…

[deleted]

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#14
I'm a computer scientist, not a mathematician (but I've taken around 25 college math courses spread over many years). Nevertheless, I do have a couple of suggestions and observations that I will address to the author that I hope is seeing this.

First, it would be a very sophisticated high school student to tackle topology and some of the other areas of abstract mathematics. I really like the topics you've picked for your book, but they do seem to require quite a bit of mathematical sophistication (e.g. Topology).

Secondly, I feel that there are a few important fields that you might consider adding to your napkin: Combinatorics, Statistics, Differential Equations, and Logic.

The usefulness and the importance of understanding statistics is pretty obvious in today's data dominated world. Statistics seems to fall outside of Mathematics at some (most?) universities, but I keep my statistics books right next to my math books.

Combinatorics is full of interesting results some esoteric (the friendship theorem) and some practical (stars and bars). The proof techniques of combinatorics are also worth studying for their own sakes (like the probabilistic method).

I've always felt a love hate relationship with Differential Equations. Theoretically, they are disappointing ("oh hey, let's try this, surprise its the solution!") but practically they are needed everywhere.

One of the best math experiences that I had in high school was a logic course that I took one summer with two other students. What fun and it always served me well in course 18.

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#15

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students. I majored in math in college, and yet there were things which I could not decipher in the first few pages of chapter 1. For example, on page 43, what is "nonzero residues modulo p"? I guess you start with something, divide by p, and get a remainder, or residue. But what is that something? Going back to page 41, I see the hint that Z is the set of integers. I vague…

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students.

That's the stated motivation, but like the 40 hours mentioned around the same place, I have always assumed it was intended to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. The material covered here would span much of an undergraduate syllabus, and it would surely take several years even for an interested and hard-working mathematics student at a top university to understand and apply all of this effectively. Indeed, there are references to concepts that you wouldn't necessarily expect to have studied in detail or perhaps even encountered at all below postgraduate level.

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#16

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students. I majored in math in college, and yet there were things which I could not decipher in the first few pages of chapter 1. For example, on page 43, what is "nonzero residues modulo p"? I guess you start with something, divide by p, and get a remainder, or residue. But what is that something? Going back to page 41, I see the hint that Z is the set of integers. I vague…

I would clarify and say that it's aimed at high school students with a serious thirst for competition math and math in general, Evan hangs around a lot (or at least he used to) on the Art of Problem Solving forums, and I think it's these students who spend their day pouring over math discussions, and math problems, that the book is aimed at. These students would already know that Z is the set of integers, and if they…

[deleted]

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#17
post #12
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Z denotes the set of integers is a sort of mathwide standard. It comes up a lot (number theory, group theory) Did you major in some specific area of maths? Or is it just the span of years between?

"The fact that Z denotes the set of integers is a sort of mathwide standard." I'm pretty sure I saw that in my high school in the early 90s, but it was a one-off event where we discussed ℕ, ℝ, ℤ, and ℚ, but we never used them for anything. I'm sitting here trying to remember our high-school set theory (which is getting cognitive interference from my college training on the topic), but my memory is claiming I either n…

We used Z a lot when dealing with modular arithmetic and complex roots of unity, mostly just to quantify our variables. I can't recall ever using N or Q in high school, though.

Also, you don't need to mention Dedekind cuts at all when dealing with R - it can be defined by the fact that it's the smallest extension of Q that's closed under limit-taking (and I think most high school math students do understand that).

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#18

This is supposed to be aimed at high school students. I majored in math in college, and yet there were things which I could not decipher in the first few pages of chapter 1. For example, on page 43, what is "nonzero residues modulo p"? I guess you start with something, divide by p, and get a remainder, or residue. But what is that something? Going back to page 41, I see the hint that Z is the set of integers. I vague…

From the current Preface:

"I initially wrote this book with talented high-school students in mind, particularly those with math-olympiad type backgrounds. Some remnants of that cultural bias can still be felt throughout the book, particularly in assorted challenge problems which are taken from mathematical competitions. However, in general I think this would be a good reference for anyone with some amount of mathematical maturity and curiosity. Examples include but certainly not limited to: math undergraduate majors, physics/CS majors, math PhD students who want to hear a little bit about fields other than their own, high school students who like math but not math contests, and unusually intelligent kittens fluent in English."

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#19
If there was an infinitely large napkin, floating in space for example, far away from everything else, would its own gravity cause it to crumple toward any folds/creases/imperfections, with sufficient force to create a cascading implosion of sufficient mass/density to create a black hole?

Re: An Infinitely Large Napkin

#20
post #19

If there was an infinitely large napkin, floating in space for example, far away from everything else, would its own gravity cause it to crumple toward any folds/creases/imperfections, with sufficient force to create a cascading implosion of sufficient mass/density to create a black hole?

An infinitely large napkin, if made of any sort of normal matter, would have infinite mass. It's gravitational pull would propigate, at c IIRC, out from the instant of its creation across all of space/time, sucking all objects (including itself) towards it's center of mass at the speed of light (OK, just under. Literally c-0.000...1m/s). It not only would create a black hole, it would signal the end of the entire universe. The destruction of any point in space would depend simply on the distance from the napkin. For every 299,792,458 meters away from napkin center, that object would have one second of existance left. When the gravitational pull hits anything, the acceleration would be so strong, again 0-c in 0 seconds, that some crazy subatomic fusion would occur.

Any physicists out there able to flesh this out? I find the thought experiment fascinating and am sure I'm missing/misrepresenting something.

Post reply on HN