Skip to main content

The Mathematics Lover's Companion - Edward Scheinerman ****

The worrying thing about this title is that I'm not sure I am a maths lover. I find some parts of mathematics interesting - infinity and probability, for example - but a lot of it is just a means to an end for me. The good news is that, even if you are like me, there's a lot to like here, though you may find yourself skipping through some parts.

 Edward Scheinerman takes us through 23 mathematical areas, so should you find a particular one doesn't work for you, it's easy enough to move onto another that does. Sometimes it wasn't the obvious ones that intrigued - where I found the section on infinity, for example, a little underwhelming, I really enjoyed the section on factorials. The book opens with prime numbers, which while not the most exciting of its contents, gives the reader a solid introduction to the level of mathematical thought they will be dealing with. It's enough to get the brain working - this isn't a pure fun read and you have to think - but not so challenging that you feel obliged to give up.

 Along the way, Scheinerman is enthusiastic and encouraging with a light, informative style. Each page has side bars (meaning there's a lot of white space), which contain occasional comments and asides. I found these rather irritating for two reasons. In part because it really breaks up the reading process - if it's worth saying, say it in the main text - and partly because (in good Fermat fashion) there's not a lot of room so, for example, when we are told the origin of the RSA algorithm in the side bar, there's space to say it's named after Rivest, Shamir and Adelman but not to say that Cocks came up with it before them.

 Occasionally, as often seems the case with mathematicians, the author seemed to be in a slightly different world. He says that the angle trisection problem is more famous that squaring the circle - which seems very unlikely - and though he notes that pi day is usually considered to be 14 March (when written as 3/14) he doesn't point out it makes much more sense in the non-US world for it to be the 22 July (22/7).

 A typical section for me was the one the constant e (like pi, a number that crops up in nature and is valuable in a number of mathematical applications). There were parts of the section that I found really interesting: I'd never really seen the point of e before, the compound interest example was an eye-opener and there's the beautiful eiÏ€= -1. The two other examples, though, I did have to skip as they were a little dull. 

 My favourite part was at the end - the sections on uncertainty, including non-transitive dice (where you can have a series of dice, each of which can beat one of the others) and equivalent poker hands, Bayesian statistics, how to have a fair election and a fascinating game (Newcomb's paradox) - where it seems that you should choose what's not best for you to come out best - were all great. It would have been even better if the election section had used terms like 'first past the post' and 'single transferable vote' to make a clearer parallel with real election systems - and the Newcomb's paradox section should have made more of the difficulty of predicting an individual's choice - but these are small concerns.

 So will anyone love all of it? Probably not. If you truly do love maths, you'll know a lot of this already. If you aren't sure about your relationship with the field, the book won't all work for you - but that bits that do should be enough to show that mathematics can make an entertaining and stimulating companion.

 Hardback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

On Time - Jim Al-Khalili *****

By a small margin Jim Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics is my favourite of his books, both because the 'three pillars' concept at its heart works so well - but also because it's short. On Time is somewhat heavier, but thankfully not a wrist-buster. It might seem at first sight odd that a book on a subset of physics is considerably longer than one covering the whole thing, but time is one of those subjects that inevitably involves considerable complexities and needs depth. As Al-Khalili establishes, it's hard to think of any other scientific concept where our perception of it - what he refers to as manifest time or psychological time - is so different from the view from physics. Some physicists go so far as to suggest that time doesn't exist at all. In the book, Al-Khalili sets out (to my mind quite successfully) both to explain why they think this is the case, but also why it's not the best interpretation of time. I'd certainly note that I...
Post a Comment
Read more

When Everyone Knows That Everyone Knows: Steven Pinker *****

In the past I've found Steven Pinker's books hypnotic - I drift along enjoying the words and feeling I'm getting something deep from it without anything much sinking in. This one was different - it was sometimes a little harder to get your head around the underlying concept, descending as it tends to into infinite regression, but overall I did feel I'd gained a lot.  Pinker's focus here is 'common knowledge' which is when not only do we both/all know something, but we know that the other(s) know as well and the implications this has for human interactions. One entertaining thing to emerge from this is the ability to get into infinite loops of the 'I know that you know that I know that...' variety. Although we aren't mentally equipped to deal with more than a handful of iterations, we are told that a simple but limited interaction like a text exchange strictly needs the full infinite set to be definitive. For example, if you and a friend are tryin...
Post a Comment
Read more