[dead]
Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
41–50 of 94 posts
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#42I've heard it said that true understanding is demonstrated when someone can explain difficult concepts well. Tao manages to convey complex ideas without making me feel like he is condescending to me. His depth of understanding is unmistakable. My changes to his list would be s/Geometry/Topology/ and I might have found a place for logic and type theory. I am especially glad he brought to mind Dynamics since that is a…
« Ce qui se conçoit bien s'énonce clairement, et les mots pour le dire arrivent aisément » Boileau
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#43I love the fact he mentioned the Riemann rearrangement theorem [1] briefly in his examples about analysis. That is (in my opinion) one of the coolest and least intuitive consequences of infinities. Requires some intro to different types of convergence to fully appreciate. More about the theorem here if you’re interested. [2] Weird as it seems it’s definitely true and one of the things you would prove in a typical undergrad sequence on analysis.
[1] https://youtu.be/OOMx2BHHWtE?is=M1lqZI2gxNqWqg6G&t=18m35s
[2] Formally, I think the normal way to state the theorem is if you have an infinite series of real numbers which is “conditionally convergent”[3], then the terms can be rearranged so that the sum converges to any arbitrary real number, or diverges https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_series_theorem
[3] Meaning it converges but does not converge absolutely. a_n = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 - 1/4 + … is an example of such a series. It converges but if you take sum of the absolute values of each term you get the harmonic series which does not coverge.
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#44Maybe he was joking -not sure but around the 5:45 mark he says "irrational" in irrational numbers comes from the Latin for insane or unreasonable. But just before that he defines the numbers as not being able to be expressed as a ratio (that's what we all learn). Just seems odd he'd juxta that. Or it's dry wit.
Well...
https://www.etymonline.com/word/irrational
> The mathematical sense "inexpressible in ordinary numbers" is from late 14c. in English, from use of the Latin word as a translation of Greek alogon in Euclid.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/ratio
> The mathematical sense of "relation between two similar magnitudes in respect to quantity," measured by the number of times one contains the other, is attested in English from 1650s (it also was a sense in Greek logos)
We can cross-check dictionary entries. The standard dictionary of Ancient Greek fully backs this up:
> λόγος
> II. 2 Math., ratio, proportion
The standard dictionary of Latin doesn't mention this particular sense. (A negative is harder to cite, but you can check it here: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext... )
The senses that the Greek word and the Latin word have in common are those of reasoning in general and numeric computation in specific. You might guess that "irrational numbers" are named for their inability to be computed. (Or, if you're only looking at Lewis and Short, you might guess that they are named by reference to an inability to think methodically; this sense exists in Latin and indeed still persists in the English word "irrational". Insanity would usually be represented by another word, presumably something more like dementialis than irrationalis.)
However, ratio is the conventional translation of the Greek logos, and since we're told that "rational" (of numbers) comes from a translation of Greek, it seems fair to attribute an existing Greek sense to the translated word too. So the best analysis does appear to be that "irrational numbers" are named, as you might expect, for the fact that they cannot be represented as integer ratios.
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#45I've heard it said that true understanding is demonstrated when someone can explain difficult concepts well. Tao manages to convey complex ideas without making me feel like he is condescending to me. His depth of understanding is unmistakable. My changes to his list would be s/Geometry/Topology/ and I might have found a place for logic and type theory. I am especially glad he brought to mind Dynamics since that is a…
agreed! it's funny, i'm returning to some of the maths i studied in undergrad with a bit more "worldly" knowledge (if you can call comp sci academia knowledge "worldly"), and i'm seeing that so so much of the stuff that was confusing was actually just trying to frame really intuitive properties. of course, the language to do so rigorously can be very dense and terse and difficult to get through, but at the end of the day, mathematicians are often trying to do some very simple things.
for example, intuitively, i and j are _basically_ the same "shape" as one another, and f and c and s and v are _basically_ the same "shape" as each other, but the two sets of shapes are definitely _not_ the same as one another...to quantify this and actually capture it in math you gotta do topology, and once you get past the point set stuff it gets real abstract real fast. but they really just wanna say "hey, my donut kinda looks like my coffee mug".
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#46Numbers Algebra Geometry Probability Analysis Dynamics I loved this talk, but these concepts are like an attempt at dimensional reduction of math research, science, the academics knowledge. I would have loved to have his thoughts on the mathematical mind, the process, how to reason, infer vs deduct, abstract, prove.. I don’t really know, what are the primitives, essential concepts of math reasoning?
Why do you feel this is a reduction? If anything, it is an attempt to summarize the various areas of math and how they relate to each other.
It’s like principal component analysis, the main axis, I don’t mean reduction in a negative way.
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#47Numbers Algebra Geometry Probability Analysis Dynamics I loved this talk, but these concepts are like an attempt at dimensional reduction of math research, science, the academics knowledge. I would have loved to have his thoughts on the mathematical mind, the process, how to reason, infer vs deduct, abstract, prove.. I don’t really know, what are the primitives, essential concepts of math reasoning?
these might not be 100% complete, but i think this does a reaaalllly good job at capturing the vast majority of mathematics.
i'm sure you could come up with another breakdown, but these also have the benefit of tracking roughly with history. numbers and geometry (euclid), then eventually algebra. probability was a fundamentally new way of looking at the world. analysis comes via newton/leibniz and then dynamics tries to tackle complex systems (kinda where newton left off, e.g., 3-body problem type stuff).
also: dimension reduction is not a bad thing. this is like a decomposition: we can decompose so much of what research mathematics is doing into 6 different basis elements. that's pretty darn neat.
(edit: liebnitz -> leibniz)
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#48Numbers Algebra Geometry Probability Analysis Dynamics I loved this talk, but these concepts are like an attempt at dimensional reduction of math research, science, the academics knowledge. I would have loved to have his thoughts on the mathematical mind, the process, how to reason, infer vs deduct, abstract, prove.. I don’t really know, what are the primitives, essential concepts of math reasoning?
Read Polya's "How to Solve It" :)
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#49I respected Terence Tao but since listening to his "Mathematics in the age of AI" talk, I've become a fan. I have had nobody else explain so succinctly what is the purpose of Mathematical research, why it matters, and why it is so important to preserve the ways we do math. Even more importantly, I feel it resonates so well with every other field AI is taking over.
I also loved this talk (went through printed version: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49362728 ) Tao talks how this has become even more valuable in maths: understanding, verification, exposition, community judgment, synthesis and canonicalization given how proof generation has become easy (which has historically been considered most valuable). So I just mapped this to coding also in my expereience and broader i…
Even before LLMs were a thing, it wasn't this way: rapidly generating code was not the most valuable skill. As you say, it's much more important that the code can be confidently modified and extended, and reused, not just now, but then. In a mature product, the initial writing of the code will be the least of the work; maintenance is much more expensive. Ideally, design decisions should appear only once in the code when this can be achieved, because then there's one place to fix or one place to modify, instead of dependencies on some detail that appear all over the code. It's too easy with auto-generated code to wind up with redundancy and code duplication, resulting in a brittle mess.
Re: Terence Tao explains 6 essential mathematical concepts [video]
#50I respected Terence Tao but since listening to his "Mathematics in the age of AI" talk, I've become a fan. I have had nobody else explain so succinctly what is the purpose of Mathematical research, why it matters, and why it is so important to preserve the ways we do math. Even more importantly, I feel it resonates so well with every other field AI is taking over.
I also loved this talk (went through printed version: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49362728 ) Tao talks how this has become even more valuable in maths: understanding, verification, exposition, community judgment, synthesis and canonicalization given how proof generation has become easy (which has historically been considered most valuable). So I just mapped this to coding also in my expereience and broader i…
Exactly my thoughts. There are people out there claiming code itself has become disposable, and maintenance and refactoring are cheap now. Which escapes the fact that a. all these are heavily subsidized now and unsustainable in the long run and b. when it comes to critical software and code, it's not really disposable and maintaining a vibe-coded codebase is going to be more costly.