Skip to main content

Math Without Numbers - Milo Beckman *****

In some ways, this is the best book about pure mathematics for the general reader that I've ever seen.  At first sight, Milo Beckman's assertion that 'the only numbers in this book are the page numbers' seems like one of those testing limits some authors place on themselves, such as Roberto Trotter's interesting attempt to explain cosmology using only the 1,000 most common words in the English language, The Edge of the Sky. But in practice, Beckman's conceit is truly liberating. Dropping numbers enables him to present maths (I can't help but wince a bit at the 'math' in the title) in a far more comprehensible way. Counting and geometry may have been the historical origin of mathematics, but it has moved on.

The book is divided into three primary sections - topology, analysis and algebra, plus a rather earnest dialogue on foundations of mathematics exploring the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorems, and a closing section on modelling (including automata and 'science'). What this approach enables Beckman to do brilliantly is to move the image of mathematics away from school maths and onto what professional mathematicians spend their time on. What's more, and perhaps more impressively for a reader who has only ever been interested in applications, it gives the best appreciation I've seen of what the point of pure mathematics is - why some find it so delightful and interesting.

Along the way in those summary headings we come across shapes, manifolds, dimensions, infinity, maps, abstraction, structures and inference. We do eventually meet, for example, sets - though they come surprisingly late when taking a conventional view. Of course not everything can be covered in detail. Groups for example, crop up with brief coverage of both symmetry groups and wallpaper groups - but we are never told what a group is. Of course, most topics have to be handled distinctly briefly. This isn't a long book (I'd say it's just the right length to be enjoyable without being either trivial or getting bogged down), but Beckman fits a lot in.

I do have a couple of small issues. As mentioned, we're told from the start the only numbers in the book are the page numbers. This isn't strictly true - numbers as words crop up reasonably regularly. And though it does provide the freedom I mentioned, in one case - Cantor's diagonal argument for the infinity of the continuum - I found the non-numeric explanation far harder to get your head around than the traditional approach using numbers. It was also, perhaps, a little unfair to include (presumably as a diversion - they aren't given any context) a pair of logic puzzles without providing the solutions: one was straightforward, but the other had some issues. In terms of content, things went ever so slightly astray when Beckman strayed into science, telling us that Newton's gravitational relationship depended on the weights of the two bodies.

No book is perfect, though. The fact remains that Math Without Numbers is a brilliant introduction to pure mathematics and a delight from end to end.

Hardback:

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

  1. Ramjet119 January 2024 at 21:59

    In your reiview Re: the hard-level quizz question you struggled with it three doors all identical that you suggest is not solvable I struggled with it as well for days as well and have a Master is Elec Eng hence why I stumbled across your post. My son solved it in in no time. Its how you read into the question what 3 identical doors mean and he realised they weren't'identical (given a different individual is in front of each and they all know each other). It's amusing how we read the question can completely throuh us off. Be nicer if we used longer descriptions to get over these misunderstandings but it's never going happen . In a way a dream for these quizz writers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more