101–110 of 204 posts
> Charles Petzold Haven't heard that name in a while. For me he's the WinApi guy - learned a lot from him when I first started programming.
Still can! His classic book Code is fantastic and has a recent second addition.
Anyone here who hasn’t read it should do so - you might think it’s ’below you’, but it’s so well written it’s a joy to read, and I suspect you’ll come out thinking of some things differently.
It reminded me why I love computing.
I found that looking at the original motivation of logarithms has been more elucidating than the way the topic is presented in grade-school. Thinking through the functional form that can solve the multiplication problem that Napier was facing (how to simplify multiplying large astronomical observations), f(ab) = f(a) + f(b), and why that leads to a unique family of functions, resonates a lot better with me for why lo…
> Charles Petzold Haven't heard that name in a while. For me he's the WinApi guy - learned a lot from him when I first started programming.
I found that looking at the original motivation of logarithms has been more elucidating than the way the topic is presented in grade-school. Thinking through the functional form that can solve the multiplication problem that Napier was facing (how to simplify multiplying large astronomical observations), f(ab) = f(a) + f(b), and why that leads to a unique family of functions, resonates a lot better with me for why lo…
Where did you pick this up? Is there a book that covers it that way?
I had a slide rule in high school. It was more of a novelty item by that point in time, only one of my math teachers even knew what a slide rule was, but that didn't stop me from figuring out how it was used and how it works. It didn't take much to figure out that the sliding action was solving problems by addition, and the funky scales were logarithmic. In other words: it performed multiplication by adding logs.
That said, I did encounter references to its original applications in other places. I studied astronomy and had an interest in the history of computation.
How timely! I just learned how to use a slide rule yesterday. Looking to pick one up, and a bit overwhelmed by the plethora of choices, I went down a small rabbit hole[0]. Some slide rules produced are pure works of art! Lately, I've been rediscovering the surprising niceties that analog tools can provide over our everything-is-a-panel-of-glass interfaces these days. Recently, I have been enjoying pen and paper as my…
I found that looking at the original motivation of logarithms has been more elucidating than the way the topic is presented in grade-school. Thinking through the functional form that can solve the multiplication problem that Napier was facing (how to simplify multiplying large astronomical observations), f(ab) = f(a) + f(b), and why that leads to a unique family of functions, resonates a lot better with me for why lo…
I often wonder about this. I also believe that mathematical pedagogy strive to attract people that are very smart and think in the abstract like euler, and not operationally, meaning they will get it intuitively. For other people, you need to swim in the original problem for a while to see the light.
On the other side, I don't think those who are involved in curriculum development are very skilled in the applications of mathematics. I am often reminded of an old FoxTrot comic where Jason calculated the area of a farmer's field using calculus.
How timely! I just learned how to use a slide rule yesterday. Looking to pick one up, and a bit overwhelmed by the plethora of choices, I went down a small rabbit hole[0]. Some slide rules produced are pure works of art! Lately, I've been rediscovering the surprising niceties that analog tools can provide over our everything-is-a-panel-of-glass interfaces these days. Recently, I have been enjoying pen and paper as my…
Charles Petzold was one of my favorite tech authors from the way begone era. Written in a style very similar in vein to the Lost of Art of Logarithms he made me fall in love with the various mundane tech concepts that would never jump out as a anything of interest, otherwise. What a treat!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I often wonder about this. I also believe that mathematical pedagogy strive to attract people that are very smart and think in the abstract like euler, and not operationally, meaning they will get it intuitively. For other people, you need to swim in the original problem for a while to see the light.
I think it is a combination of factors. Mathematical pedagogy is legitimate if the end goal is to train mathematicians, so yes it is geared towards those who think in the abstract. (I'm going to ignore the comment about very smart, since I don't think mathematical ability should be used as a proxy for intelligence.) On the other side, I don't think those who are involved in curriculum development are very skilled in…