Previously, I loved the iGoogle design. The new stuff really drives me nuts.
Gmail always previews at least one e-mail. I had prefered to show 0 previews since I like to check iGoogle regularly and only want to review my e-mails when I am at home.
CNN, FoxNews, BBC, etc. are now way too wordy. Before, the amount of information was right for me. Now, each of these links is an eyesore.
The Sidebar is clunky. I am the type of person who had used tabs and had filled my "home" tab with three columns of information. Now, I have a sidebar that is overfilled with a list of each item that I cannot turn off.
In short, unless iGoogle changes back, I'm switching to NetVibes or MyYahoo.
In honor of Pi Day, I offer a story and a proof. This is a true story.
My mother (now retired) used to be an elementary school teacher in the LA area. One day, she was comparing the circumference of a circle with the diameter and she noticed that no matter how big the circle, this ratio seemed to be constant.
She was very excited and she mentioned it to the other teachers. One teacher told her that it couldn't be true. If it were true, it would be well known. The principal got involved and asked my mother not to tell the kids this since it is not an official part of the lesson.
When she told me, I shook my head and explained to her that pi, by definition, is the ratio of the circumference to the diameter. That she was right. It is always the same for all circles which is why pi is such an important constant. It was pretty scary that no one in her entire elementary school understood this including the principle.
Now, for all those who doubt that such a constant exists, here's a proof (see Corollary 1):
From my view, this is the classic debate in technology: emulating nature vs. reinventing nature.
When people first tried to fly, they copied birds but the better solution was to understand the principles of aerodynamics and leverage the technology available.
The wheel was a better idea than trying to recreate feet.
In the key words vs natural language debate, Google has shown that key words is the better solution for now.
The real question is: how do you make searches more intuitive to the person making the search?
After all, usability is the only criteria that matters.
PowerSet.com claims to have a natural language search that's superior to the keywords searches. Let's see if PowerSet has the service to back up its boasts. PowerSet.com currently hides its service -- which is not a good sign.
I was someone who was once considered to be exceptional in math. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of stopping at calculus.
To regain my mastery of mathematics, I decided to take a single math problem very seriously. I figured that I would try to understand the solution by grounding all ideas down to postulates.
I figured that this was a great way to learn mathematics anew and really get advanced. I soon learned that there were wonderful
math resources on the web. Wikipedia is really great. There's also MathWorld.com., PlanetMath, MathForum.org, and Cut-The-Knot.org.
Being pretty ambitious, I chose Fermat's Last Theorem and Andrew Wiles's solution as my jump off point. I started this adventure
in 2004. Since then, because the problem is so tough, I started blogging through the different threads of the problem and I find
myself recreating the history of mathematics from the perspective of number theory.
I am not sure that this approach would work for everyone but if you are a solid problem solver, it can really make advanced mathematics more fun. If you are interested to see what I came up with, you can check out my blog a
My math blog. I also started a
general math blog.
I am very optimistic about the possibilities of making science and math fascinating writing topics.
When I a kid, my father was into science and science fiction so I watched the Time Machine, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the wonderful Ascent of Man as well as Carl Sagan's Cosmos. Perhaps, it was inevitable that I would go into mathematics/computers when my favorite Sesame Street character was the Count.:-)
I think that the trick is to approach mathematics and science from multiple perspectives including:
(i) Historical (the major turning events -- Kepler's Equations, Thales invention of proof, Newton's Laws, etc.)
(ii) Biographical (Math and science are filled with interesting folks: Pythagorus, Sophie Germain, Leonhard Euler, and of course, Kurt Goedel)
(iii) Artistic (Take a watch of the movie Pi or even rewatch the Matrix -- numbers and mysticism have a charm even if their meanings go unexplored; fractals and chaos theory have really fascinating visuals)
(iv) Mathematics/Science for Poets (One of the best classes I ever took at UCLA, learned why Foucalt's Pendulum proved that the earth rotated and learned Maxwell's prediction of radio waves based on believing that eletricity and magnetism were two aspects of the same thing)
In my free time, I have taken the question very seriously of whether mathematics can be conceptually interesting independent of its problem solving applications. For the past two years, I have been working on a blog dedicated to this question and specifically to the history and people behind Fermat's Last Theorem:
Let's not talk about qualifications. This is really ignoring the issue.
First, let me say that I believe that global warming is a terrible threat and I believe that the nay sayers are most often ignoring the science.
That being said, I am very glad when someone intelligent makes an intelligent argument. Especially one that I don't know the answer to. I am not a meteorologist but I love learning and I love science. I learn through good, solid discussion.
If you believe that his argument is bad, don't question his expertise, provide a strong answer. Then, you can educate all the people who are reading this.
Please provide the argument. I look forward to thinking about it if you understand the meteorological data well enough yourself.
Cheers,
-Larry
Discussion means hearing pros and cons. Discussion is different from policy. Our policy should be to stop global warming and excess CO2 emissions (that's obvious, isn't it?) But in the mean time, let's have a good, solid discussion where we consider the nay-sayers (as long their naysaying is intelligent) and answer them.
If the Global Warming theory is correct (and I personally believe it is), let's still have a discussion. The theory should be able to stand up to the criticism. The pay off is that you have a more detailed, more rigorous theory. Every once in a while the minority view is correct but I agree with you that this is very rare.
The biggest danger is that we silence the critics and prevent discussion. This is unfortunately very easy to do when you have a consensus. Policy can't wait. Fine. But discussion should still happen. I hope that I made my point clear.
If you are truly in favor of science, I suspect that you will agree that you misunderstood my point.
Cheers,
-Larry
I think that he is right. The only way to have meaningful discussion is to consider both sides.
I think it is awesome when someone like Freeman Dyson makes this point. I think it is pretty silly when it is Dennis Miller or Sean Hannity. Dyson is making arguments. He is not attacking the people.
His main point as I understand it is that the real world is far too messy to be explained by simple, ideal meteorological models. Of course, he's right. This argument applies equally to all science. Even Newton's laws are only true within certain assumptions (the ability to ignore quantum effects and relativistic effects, for example).
But this then is the essence of the question. Are the ideal assumptions of the meteorologists right enough to be worth worrying about?
I think the next step is for some noted meteorologist to respectfully address Dyson's concerns and put up his/her best answer. This is how science (in the ideal) proceeds. Let's hope that science in the real proceeds approximately close enough for real debate to occur.
-Larry
From my view, Mathematics is as exciting as art. The mistake is often that math is presented as "weeder" subject rather than presented as one of the great achievements of civilization.
I started one of the first math blogs (http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com) and the good news is that the math blogosphere is growing!:-)
I hope that this news story is a blip in education history like the schools that forbid the teaching of evolution. It is really just embarrassing all the way around.
-Larry
This was a very interesting article. It explains the trends that I am seeing.
In April of last year, I started a math-focused blog: http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com/
To be honest, I thought that no one would be interested. Instead, I am seeing the number of unique visitor rise by 10-20% each month.
I think that the bar is rising on the amount of mathematics that each of us are expected to know. It will be very interesting to see what happens with Google Analytics, Omniture, and other web-based analytical engines.
Cheers,
-Larry
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely include Terry Pratchett. Missing from the list are some of the most important fantasy writers of this century:
Terry Pratchett
George R. R. Martin
Robert Howard
Lord Dunsany
J. K. Rowling
Roald Dahl
Neil Gaiman
Previously, I loved the iGoogle design. The new stuff really drives me nuts.
Gmail always previews at least one e-mail. I had prefered to show 0 previews since I like to check iGoogle regularly and only want to review my e-mails when I am at home.
CNN, FoxNews, BBC, etc. are now way too wordy. Before, the amount of information was right for me. Now, each of these links is an eyesore.
The Sidebar is clunky. I am the type of person who had used tabs and had filled my "home" tab with three columns of information. Now, I have a sidebar that is overfilled with a list of each item that I cannot turn off.
In short, unless iGoogle changes back, I'm switching to NetVibes or MyYahoo.
Actually, there's an entertaining book called In Search of Stupidity that makes the same claim as Bill Gates.
Tech Companies succeed not by maximizing excellence (the book is a response to In Search of Excellence) but by minimizing stupidity.
Mathematics has both invention and discovery parts to it.
Mathematical systems are invented. Non-Euclidean
Geometry is an invention as shown by the
varieties available.
Invention to me is an arbitrary choice made amidst
a multitude of choices that is often
made for artistic or stylistic reasons.
Discovery is what you find when you use a mathematical
system. Theorems are the discoveries.
Base 10 is an invention. Pi is a discovery.
The Euclidean geometric system with its set of
axioms, definitions, etc. is an invention. The
Pythagorean Theorem is a discovery.
In honor of Pi Day, I offer a story and a proof. This is a true story.
My mother (now retired) used to be an elementary school teacher in the LA area. One day, she was comparing the circumference of a
circle with the diameter and she noticed that no matter how big the circle, this ratio seemed to be constant.
She was very excited and she mentioned it to the other teachers. One teacher told her that it couldn't be true. If it were true,
it would be well known. The principal got involved and asked my mother not to tell the kids this since it is not an
official part of the lesson.
When she told me, I shook my head and explained to her that pi, by definition, is the ratio of the circumference to the diameter.
That she was right. It is always the same for all circles which is why pi is such an important constant. It was pretty
scary that no one in her entire elementary school understood this including the principle.
Now, for all those who doubt that such a constant exists, here's a proof (see Corollary 1):
Proof that pi exists
Happy Pi Day!
-Larry
From my view, this is the classic debate in technology: emulating nature vs. reinventing nature.
When people first tried to fly, they copied birds but the better solution was to understand the principles of aerodynamics and
leverage the technology available.
The wheel was a better idea than trying to recreate feet.
In the key words vs natural language debate, Google has shown that key words is the better solution for now.
The real question is: how do you make searches more intuitive to the person making the search?
After all, usability is the only criteria that matters.
PowerSet.com claims to have a natural language search that's superior to the keywords searches. Let's see if PowerSet has the service to back up its boasts. PowerSet.com currently hides its service -- which is not a good sign.
There are numerous companies that are ahead of Google when it comes to Personal Health Records.
You can see a list of these companies at MyPhr.Com. Wikipedia also has a good article.
Steve Case has started a company called Revolution Health
I work at a PHR company called ICW which is headquartered in Germany.
I think it's all very exciting as long as you see in the context of the other offerings that are out there.
-Larry
I was someone who was once considered to be exceptional in math. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of stopping at calculus.
To regain my mastery of mathematics, I decided to take a single math problem very seriously. I figured that I would try to
understand the solution by grounding all ideas down to postulates.
I figured that this was a great way to learn mathematics anew and really get advanced. I soon learned that there were wonderful
math resources on the web. Wikipedia is really great. There's also MathWorld.com.,
PlanetMath, MathForum.org, and
Cut-The-Knot.org.
Being pretty ambitious, I chose Fermat's Last Theorem and Andrew Wiles's solution as my jump off point. I started this adventure
in 2004. Since then, because the problem is so tough, I started blogging through the different threads of the problem and I find
myself recreating the history of mathematics from the perspective of number theory.
I am not sure that this approach would work for everyone but if you are a solid problem solver, it can really make advanced
mathematics more fun. If you are interested to see what I came up with, you can check out my blog a My math blog.
I also started a general math blog.
Best of luck in learning mathematics.
-Larry
I am very optimistic about the possibilities of making science and math fascinating writing topics.
:-)
:-)
When I a kid, my father was into science and science fiction so I watched the Time Machine, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the wonderful Ascent of Man as well as Carl Sagan's Cosmos. Perhaps, it was inevitable that I would go into mathematics/computers when my favorite Sesame Street character was the Count.
I think that the trick is to approach mathematics and science from multiple perspectives including:
(i) Historical (the major turning events -- Kepler's Equations, Thales invention of proof, Newton's Laws, etc.)
(ii) Biographical (Math and science are filled with interesting folks: Pythagorus, Sophie Germain, Leonhard Euler, and of course, Kurt Goedel)
(iii) Artistic (Take a watch of the movie Pi or even rewatch the Matrix -- numbers and mysticism have a charm even if their meanings go unexplored; fractals and chaos theory have really fascinating visuals)
(iv) Mathematics/Science for Poets (One of the best classes I ever took at UCLA, learned why Foucalt's Pendulum proved that the earth rotated and learned Maxwell's prediction of radio waves based on believing that eletricity and magnetism were two aspects of the same thing)
In my free time, I have taken the question very seriously of whether mathematics can be conceptually interesting independent of its problem solving applications. For the past two years, I have been working on a blog dedicated to this question and specifically to the history and people behind Fermat's Last Theorem:
http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com
Thanks very much for bringing up this topic!
-Larry
Let's not talk about qualifications. This is really ignoring the issue. First, let me say that I believe that global warming is a terrible threat and I believe that the nay sayers are most often ignoring the science. That being said, I am very glad when someone intelligent makes an intelligent argument. Especially one that I don't know the answer to. I am not a meteorologist but I love learning and I love science. I learn through good, solid discussion. If you believe that his argument is bad, don't question his expertise, provide a strong answer. Then, you can educate all the people who are reading this. Please provide the argument. I look forward to thinking about it if you understand the meteorological data well enough yourself. Cheers, -Larry
Discussion means hearing pros and cons. Discussion is different from policy. Our policy should be to stop global warming and excess CO2 emissions (that's obvious, isn't it?) But in the mean time, let's have a good, solid discussion where we consider the nay-sayers (as long their naysaying is intelligent) and answer them. If the Global Warming theory is correct (and I personally believe it is), let's still have a discussion. The theory should be able to stand up to the criticism. The pay off is that you have a more detailed, more rigorous theory. Every once in a while the minority view is correct but I agree with you that this is very rare. The biggest danger is that we silence the critics and prevent discussion. This is unfortunately very easy to do when you have a consensus. Policy can't wait. Fine. But discussion should still happen. I hope that I made my point clear. If you are truly in favor of science, I suspect that you will agree that you misunderstood my point. Cheers, -Larry
I think that he is right. The only way to have meaningful discussion is to consider both sides. I think it is awesome when someone like Freeman Dyson makes this point. I think it is pretty silly when it is Dennis Miller or Sean Hannity. Dyson is making arguments. He is not attacking the people. His main point as I understand it is that the real world is far too messy to be explained by simple, ideal meteorological models. Of course, he's right. This argument applies equally to all science. Even Newton's laws are only true within certain assumptions (the ability to ignore quantum effects and relativistic effects, for example). But this then is the essence of the question. Are the ideal assumptions of the meteorologists right enough to be worth worrying about? I think the next step is for some noted meteorologist to respectfully address Dyson's concerns and put up his/her best answer. This is how science (in the ideal) proceeds. Let's hope that science in the real proceeds approximately close enough for real debate to occur. -Larry
From my view, Mathematics is as exciting as art. The mistake is often that math is presented as "weeder" subject rather than presented as one of the great achievements of civilization. I started one of the first math blogs (http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com) and the good news is that the math blogosphere is growing! :-)
I hope that this news story is a blip in education history like the schools that forbid the teaching of evolution. It is really just embarrassing all the way around.
-Larry
This was a very interesting article. It explains the trends that I am seeing. In April of last year, I started a math-focused blog: http://fermatslasttheorem.blogspot.com/ To be honest, I thought that no one would be interested. Instead, I am seeing the number of unique visitor rise by 10-20% each month. I think that the bar is rising on the amount of mathematics that each of us are expected to know. It will be very interesting to see what happens with Google Analytics, Omniture, and other web-based analytical engines. Cheers, -Larry