Simpsons Guide to Math

tu-tone writes "The LA times has done an article titled "Simpsons analysts show how math figures into episodes" based off of work done by two professors Andrew Nestler and Sarah J. Greenwald. The work is a Guide to Appearances of Mathematics and Mathematicians on "The Simpsons" . They even gave a talk on it at Harvey Mudd College. It's a fun read." There's a transcript of one of their presentations available.

Comments

Euler's Equation

[Remik]

In the (in)famous 3-D Simpsons when Homer wanders into the freaky 3-D realm, the equation floating in the background [e^(pi*i)=-1] is infact a form of Euler's equation, one of the most important equations in math. In it's traditional form, [e^(pi*i)]+1=0 it relates the 5 most important constants in math.

Re:Euler's Equation

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, did you notice the hexadecimal string in 3D land, "46 72 69 6E 6B 20 72 75 6C 65 73 21", decodes as "Frink rules!" in ASCII?

That's more funny than a stupid "how many gallons in a pound" joke, IMO.

Re:Euler's Equation

[Uri]

In it's traditional form, [e^(pi*i)]+1=0, it relates the 5 most important constants in math...

...and is beaten only by 0*i*pi*e = 1+-1

That article was too long

[sg3000]

My attention span isn't long enough to read the whole article. Damn TV! You've ruined my imagination! Just like you've ruined my ability to ... my ability to ...

[turns on Itchy and Scratchy]

... and physics too ...

[spoonist]

In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!

- Homer Jay Simpson

That's not the point

[kannen]

They weren't talking about the Simpsons as a means of any serious sort of study, they were talking about the Simpsons as a means of making their classes fun.

Their argument is this: for those in college right now, the Simpsons has been on television for almost all of their lives. This year's freshmen were in 1st GRADE when the Simpsons first came on the air. And, these kids LOVE the Simpsons. Lucky for Math professors, a wide range of mathematical topics are covered within the Simpsons. So, if you want to connect with your students, try finding a Simpsons clip that is connected to your current topic and use that as a launch pad for in class discussion.

I think you have to give these guys props, because they are actually trying to break through the wall that is between the professor and the average student so that the student might actually become interested in mat. Wow. Professors who care! This is cool.

Re:That's not the point

[babbage]

You know, now that you mention it my brother (now a college junior) did exactly this in high school. I forget what the impetus for it was -- I'll have to ask next time I see him -- but he and a classmate did a presentation on the physics of the Simpsons in the form of a lesson to younger students. At first I thought it was a little silly (in a good way mind you :), but it seems like he made all the same sorts of points that you did: the show has been around forever, and has all kinds of good references to scientific & mathematical material in there.

Still, my favorite "damn the writers of the Simpsons are over-educated genuses" gag is from one of the old Halloween episodes, in which they re-created Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven." If you'll recall, the bird in that show was drawn with Bart's head, so Bart = Raven. Look up the name Bart in a baby book and you'll find that it's the nickname for one of two longer names: Bartholemew, and (much less commonly of course) Bartram (or is it Bertram? I forget the spelling, it's been a while now...). And if you look up Bartram, you'll find that it's an Old English word referring to a person that handles ...ravens. [Kind of the same way that a falconer is a person that keeps & takes care of falcons, a ravener or "bartram" is a person that keeps ravens.] Now this is more than a little esoteric, and it could well be a coincidence (they had to get Bart in there somewhere, right?), but considering how often little gags like this crop up my bet is that it was deliberate. And my guess is that, of all the millions of people that watch the Simpsons, and of all the dozens that know how to speak Old English, there had to be no more than a handful of people that watched that episode, got the joke, realized that millions of others would have totally missed it, and laughed their damn heads off.... :)

Ever since I came across that, I've come to believe more and more strongly that Simpsons is our modern day Shakespeare. This gag is at least on par with Hamlet's "country matters" line in cleverness, and they manage to do it all the time. Will the show be remembered for as long or as fondly as Shakespeare? Who knows, but it could well happen and I wouldn't be surprised at all.

let users mod up rejected submissions.

[Anonymous Coward]

a review of the past two days of news on slashdot.

news that hasn't made it:
-flexible ceramics (hybrid polymers) created using nanoscale chemistry at cornell
-a 1mm microscope that can examine individual molecules from within a cell developed at uc berkeley
-nasa and purdue announce serious investment of time and money on advanced life support systems which will likely be the basis for extraterrestrial colonization
-#1 site critical of scientology yanked from google

what has made it:
-resident evil movie review
-simpsons guide to math
-self heating can
-"please help me start my project because i am too stupid to figure it out myself" ask slashdot

The Metric System and Grandpa's Car

[rjthomas61]

>Marge: Now I know you haven't liked some of my past suggestions, like switching to the metric system.
>Grampa: The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

Let's see....
40 rods/Hogshead x
1 mile/320 rods x
1 Hogshead/63 gallons =
0.00198 miles/gallon or
504 gallons/mile

Perhaps Grampa drives an SUV?

Re:Biblical Pi

[belloc]

Actually, according to the bible, the value of pi is 3 exactly. Check out 1 Kings 7:23...

What 1 Kings 7:23 says:

"Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high, and a line of thirty cubits measured its circumference."

What it doesn't say:

"...a mathematical circle whose diameter is ten point zero zero cubits will have a circumference of thirty point zero zero cubits, thus saith the LORD, and those who tried to think otherwise were smited down by the tyrannical God of the Old Testament...."

1. The passage is describing the construction of a molten freaking sea, it's not a mathematical treatise on the nature of the circle.

2. Not only is this not a mathematical treatise, it's not even an engineering plan or construction document. It's just a loose description. "Thirty cubits" isn't a bad ballpark estimation of 31.4159... cubits when you're just describing the thing in layman's terms, especially when you don't know whether the "ten cubits from brim to brim" is an inside diameter, outside diameter, or center-wall to center-wall diameter.

3. Even if this passage were an engineering plan, no constructed, material "circle" is ever going to have a circumference of exactly pi times its diameter. There will always be a discrepancy by which it will be off, plus or minus, depending on the matter and its application, and the technological ability to fabricate it. The dimensions of a molten sea, for example, can be expected be off by more than, say, dimensinons of optical mirror components.

4. Sheesh. People will say anything.

Belloc

Calculus is borderline insanity.

[darkonc]

This reminds me of one of my (original) math jokes... It came from two semi-related incidents: Debunking a 2=1 math proof that our math teacher threw up for us in grade 10, and then learning about how calculus works.

The 2=1 proof depended on creating a non-obvious reference to 0/0=1, and then reducing down to 2=1.

Looking at it for a while, I relized that 0/0=x is the same as solving for 0=x*0 ... In other words, X can be anything (integer, real , complex...).

In first-year honors calculus, I realized that calculus is based on the same kind of construct, except for that you're solving for the limit of a/b=x as a and b approach zero -- in other words, dancing with the devil of 0/0.

The moral of my story:

Calculus is based on the fact that 0/0 can be anything you want, depending on how you approach it.

Any references to prior art (I first came up with that pun in 1980)?