Mathematics. The BIG game Behind the little tricks

Similar documents
The way we convince people is generally to refer to sufficiently many things that they already know are correct.

6.041SC Probabilistic Systems Analysis and Applied Probability, Fall 2013 Transcript Lecture 3

MITOCW Lec 2 MIT 6.042J Mathematics for Computer Science, Fall 2010

A Romp through the Foothills of Logic: Session 2

Class #14: October 13 Gödel s Platonism

Friends and strangers

It Ain t What You Prove, It s the Way That You Prove It. a play by Chris Binge

HOMILY Questions on the Final Exam

Here s a very dumbed down way to understand why Gödel is no threat at all to A.I..

MITOCW watch?v=ogo1gpxsuzu

MITOCW watch?v=ppqrukmvnas

A Posteriori Necessities by Saul Kripke (excerpted from Naming and Necessity, 1980)

Searle vs. Chalmers Debate, 8/2005 with Death Monkey (Kevin Dolan)

Gödel's incompleteness theorems

>> Marian Small: I was talking to a grade one teacher yesterday, and she was telling me

MITOCW ocw f08-rec10_300k

Twice Around Podcast Episode #2 Is the American Dream Dead? Transcript

MITOCW 3. V: Recursive Structures and Processes

ABSOLUTISM. The absolutist believes mathematics is:

Absolutism. The absolutist believes mathematics is:

First John Chapter 5 John Karmelich

Back to the Bible Radio Transcript Series: The Joy of Certain Salvation Program Title: The Basis of Our Salvation Dr.

Lesson 09 Notes. Machine Learning. Intro

The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support

Logic & Proofs. Chapter 3 Content. Sentential Logic Semantics. Contents: Studying this chapter will enable you to:

Al-Sijistani s and Maimonides s Double Negation Theology Explained by Constructive Logic

1 Introduction. Cambridge University Press Epistemic Game Theory: Reasoning and Choice Andrés Perea Excerpt More information

2.1 Review. 2.2 Inference and justifications

The Ontological Argument for the existence of God. Pedro M. Guimarães Ferreira S.J. PUC-Rio Boston College, July 13th. 2011

MITOCW ocw f99-lec19_300k

Debate on the mind and scientific method (continued again) on

The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support

THE DRESS. by Miles Mathis

6.080 / Great Ideas in Theoretical Computer Science Spring 2008

6.041SC Probabilistic Systems Analysis and Applied Probability, Fall 2013 Transcript Lecture 21

Richard van de Lagemaat Relative Values A Dialogue

First John Chapter 4 John Karmelich

TRUTH IN MATHEMATICS. H.G. Dales and G. Oliveri (eds.) (Clarendon: Oxford. 1998, pp. xv, 376, ISBN X) Reviewed by Mark Colyvan

Argument Mapping. Table of Contents. By James Wallace Gray 2/13/2012

Under the command of algorithms

Lesson 07 Notes. Machine Learning. Quiz: Computational Learning Theory

What s the purpose of life and existence?

Lecture 9. A summary of scientific methods Realism and Anti-realism

Faults and Mathematical Disagreement

Why Rosenzweig-Style Midrashic Approach Makes Rational Sense: A Logical (Spinoza-like) Explanation of a Seemingly Non-logical Approach

Daniel Davis - poems -

The Argument Clinic. Monty Python. Index: Atheism and Awareness (Clues) Home to Positive Atheism. Receptionist: Yes, sir?

The Power of the Ask Eugene Lee

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

Does the name Hari Seldon mean anything to any of you? Okay, I must be the only science fiction geek in the room

MITOCW watch?v=k2sc-wpdt6k

Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)

Student Testimonials/Journal Entries

On Infinite Size. Bruno Whittle

Crossing the Equal Sign

Ep #130: Lessons from Jack Canfield. Full Episode Transcript. With Your Host. Brooke Castillo. The Life Coach School Podcast with Brooke Castillo

MITOCW L21

Negative Introspection Is Mysterious

Multitasking causes a kind of brownout in the brain. Meyer says all the lights go dim because there just isn't enough power to go around.

A romp through the foothills of logic Session 3

Informalizing Formal Logic

"We Think That We Think Clearly, But That's Only Because We Don't Think Clearly": Brian Josephson on Mathematics, Mind, and the Human World*

MITOCW ocw f99-lec18_300k

Jimmy comes on stage, whistling or humming a song, looks around,

HOW COME? So why do the prayers of so many of God s children seem like they are falling on deaf ears? What is the problem?

TRANSITIVITY AND PARADOXES

Shema/Listen. Podcast Date: March 14, 2017 (28:00) Speakers in the audio file: Jon Collins. Tim Mackie

Living the Love of Jesus

6.00 Introduction to Computer Science and Programming, Fall 2008

The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support

What Are You Saying To You About You? Erika T. Kendrick

semantic-extensional interpretation that happens to satisfy all the axioms.

Alignment Law of Attraction and the Seven Universal Laws

PHI2391: Logical Empiricism I 8.0

Theory of Knowledge. 5. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree?

Epistemology. Diogenes: Master Cynic. The Ancient Greek Skeptics 4/6/2011. But is it really possible to claim knowledge of anything?

Interview with Cathy O Neil, author, Weapons of Math Destruction. For podcast release Monday, November 14, 2016

TRANSCRIPT OUTSIDE THE CAMP WITH CHIP BROGDEN

The Mystery of Openness

Pastor's Notes. Hello

PHIL-176: DEATH. Lecture 15 - The Nature of Death (cont.); Believing You Will Die [March 6, 2007]

How I became interested in foundations of mathematics.

This fallacy gets its name from the Latin phrase "post hoc, ergo propter hoc," which translates as "after this, therefore because of this.

Skim the Article to Find its Conclusion and Get a Sense of its Structure

Fear, Emotions & False Beliefs

UNITY IN BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING

TwiceAround Podcast Episode 7: What Are Our Biases Costing Us? Transcript

3 Articles with Proof and Disproof of Birch and Swinnerton

Logic for Computer Science - Week 1 Introduction to Informal Logic

Sermon Christ the King John 18, Daniel 7 By Pastor Christopher Miller

Interviewing an Earthbound Spirit 18 November 2017

Deduction by Daniel Bonevac. Chapter 1 Basic Concepts of Logic

"Yes, sir, we're open until 6 p.m. If you tell me what you need, I can set it aside for you."

Class 13. Entering into the Spirit of It Part I

CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS

The Hard Work of Life Together September 13, Oxford Christian Church James 3:17-18; 1 Corinthians 13:1-7

"HANG IN THERE WITH YOUR PRAYERS 11. A Sermon By. Rev. Philip A. C. Clarke

Verification and Validation

Church-Turing Thesis

I'm just curious, even before you got that diagnosis, had you heard of this disability? Was it on your radar or what did you think was going on?

Transcription:

Mathematics The BIG game Behind the little tricks Marta Maria Casetti @mmcasetti (She/Her) Hi there! :-) The goal of this talk is to show maths is nothing to fear, but it's a tool to embrace to empower yourself (and have fun too). Don't worry about what society told you: just relax and be ready for a journey (or a travel guide, more like this is just a talk).

Our teacher began by saying that French has very difcult sounds to pronounce, for instance en. She repeated this sound three times, then asked each student to replicate it. Then she declared that we would have never really learned French. (Peter Bichsel) School mathematics is often taught in a punitive way, as a succession of exercises designed to trick you into failing. This is usually because exercises of that kind are perfect for giving grades that pigeonhole people. But mathematics is a creative endeavour, not much different from a language. How would you feel if someone taught you only the difficulties of the grammar and never mentioned the possibility of a literature? Wouldn't you hate that language?

What is mathematics? NO. (Not good mathematics, at least.) OK, technically this is mathematics. But it's mostly something made to trick you into failing an exam. A good part of mathematics was invented to avoid calculations: abstract from the single case, find a general rule, solve the problem once and for all.

What is mathematics? (A B) ( B A) That's more like it. OK, this is a cheap theatrical trick on my part. Sorry. You can imagine this as being presented with a very long word in a foreign language - but a word that once you grasp the very basics of that language makes sense. Please forgive the cheap trick and bear with me. You will not just understand this slide, you will OWN what it says in your mind. (With a little help from the handouts, if needed. This is not a test.)

A Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy DON'T PANIC is always in line with a geekfest.

Keep calm and do maths. (Sorry.) Mathematics is a game played according to simple rules with meaningless marks on paper (David Hilbert) This is possibly my favourite quote about mathematics. You can learn to do mathematics just as you learn to play a board game. Or to speak Klingon, or Quenya. The approach that works for you is the right one. You can combine the two, of course. See? It's as if maths wants you to learn it!

Is it worth it? The romantic argument! You learn a new language that gives you new ideas. You discover a world of beauty in your mind.

Yes, I said beauty. But Maths is objective, beauty is subjective! Well... Two mathematicians can disagree on the beauty of a theorem, or a formula. (They do. A lot.) Here's a debate on Quora about which is the most beautiful mathematical equation - but really, just ask Google and you'll hit a dozen mathematicians arguing. www.quora.com/what-is-the-most-beautiful-equation

Three examples. I don't have time to explain you these. BUT! Look at how general they are (almost no numbers), how plain they look (especially the first two: there aren't many calculations in there) And they are quite different. As I said, it's a matter of taste. The first one (Euler's Identity) is usually the winner in the most beautiful polls.

Mathematicians can have romantic lives. For an extensive collection of biographies, go to www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk - or Wikipedia! Yes, there are women (Sofia Kovalevskaya; Sophie Germain; Emmy Noether); two people with disability (Niccolò Fontana Tartaglia Tartaglia is a nickname that means stutter ; Leonhard Euler, of most beautiful equation fame, went blind in his later years); there are people who are not white (Muhammad ibn Musa al-khwarizmi, hence the word algorithm ; the Persian poet Omar Khayyam) although maths dates back to when white European people were the uncivilized ones...

Remember: mathematics is many different things. NOT THIS. Maths is not Soylent. Maths is a banquet.

...so it's easier to nd something you like! Important: it doesn't necessarily get harder. Actually, the first topics are the hardest, because you have to get used to the whole new thing. Also, easy and hard are very subjective just like beautiful. It happens in your mind, and your mind is unique. Also: even if there are topics that are needed to understand something, there isn't a path that you have to follow strictly. Sometimes you can reach the same topic from two different sides, and one clarifies the other. In other words: a world to explore, not a series of checkpoints.

Is it worth it? The moral/ethical argument! You learn to be honest and challenge your assumptions. Mathematics is based on not giving anything for granted: everything you do must be explicitly stated in the hypothesis of the theorem, in the definitions, or in the axioms. A nice (although technical) example of an application to politics and sociology: a data-based study that measures the sexist bias in everyday language, or more precisely in our mental associations. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602025/howvector-space-mathematics-reveals-the-hiddensexism-in-language/#

Here's David Hilbert again. Mathematics knows no races or boundaries. For mathematics, the world is one country. It's powerful. It can be shared. It must be shared. Especially if you've been denied power over yourself. And yes, I do love David Hilbert.

Six habits of highly mathematical people. Discussing denitions. Evaluating many possible consequences of a claim. Tearing apart the assumptions underlying an argument. Coming up with counterexamples. Being wrong often and admitting it. Scaling the ladder of abstraction. (by Jeremy Kun) From: medium.com/@jeremyjkun/habits-of-highly-mathemat ical-people-b719df12d15e#.6y4g8qpiy It's very interesting and very true, at least in my experience (and the experience of the mathematics professor who linked it on Twitter).

So... LET'S PLAY! (A B) ( B A) I told you you'd end up owning this thing in your mind...

Again DON'T PANIC

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You get used to them. (John von Neumann) My other favourite quote about mathematics, from possibly the greatest mathematician of the 20th century. His biography on Wikipedia gives you an idea of how much mathematics is an umbrella term. I think it's one of the most dangerous misunderstanding that scares people away from mathematics: you can reach the point where you perceive mathematical ideas as you perceive the world but don't expect them to make sense. By the way, a priest told me that it happens the same with theology. Von Neumann had an interesting life, who literally shaped the 20 th Century not always for the best. You can read about him on Wikipedia.

Goal of the game. Something can be true or false. But you don't know if it is. Aren't you even a bit curious? So, let's play. We're going to see the rules. As I said before: don't worry about understanding. It's not like you understand the rules of poker, you just play it. (If you know the rules, or you can look them up easily, of course.)

The game. You assume a few things to be true, and declare them. (Axioms) You make up precise ideas and give them names. (Denitions) You connect the ideas. (Theorems) How it works!

Theorems in theory. You declare the boundaries of where your theorem will hold. (Hypothesis) You state your thesis. (Thesis) You show the connection. (Proof) In theory...

Theorems in real life. And in practice. This is a wonderful article that tells you a bit more about how mathematicians work. Spoiler: Hollywood usually gets it wrong. (Big Hero 6 gets it pretty well, though.) www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/07/29/the-poetryand-process-behind-every-mathematical-proof/#169b 74551ae7

Today's game: logic! Our basic pawns are called statements. They can have value True or False. We denote them with capital letters like A, B, C... A B is the statement both A and B are true (and) A B is the statement A and/or B are true (or) A is the statement A is false (not) A few pawns and a few more rules for today's game!

Two more denitions A B is the statement if A happens, then B must happen (if / then) A B is the statement if A happens, then B must happen and vice versa (if and only if) Another two meaningless symbols

Two axioms Axiom: the statement (A A) is false. (A cannot be both true and false.) Axiom: the statement (A A) is true. (A must be either true or false) Two things we give for granted. They might sound intuitive (they are, in my experience of the world), but we have to state them anyway.

A theorem: contraposition (A B) if and only if ( B A) FIND YOUR WAY! Your theorem! There are two possible proofs in the handouts, but many more are possible. You can find another one, maybe.

Yes, I love David Hilbert quotes. We must know. We will know! (SPOILER: Sorry, David.) Do you feel powerful? Historical note: the quote We must know, we will know is written on Hilbert's grave too. Problem it's not that simple. Never take things for granted...

Gödel's incompleteness theorem If a formal system is consistent and complex enough to contain arithmetic, then it is incomplete; that is, there are statements that cannot be proven to be true or false....not even that you can prove things. Formal system basically means a bunch of axioms and definitions. Consistent means that there are no contradiction. Complex enough to contain arithmetic means that you can do 1+1. Then there are statements that are true or false (because they're statements, it's their nature), but there is no proof of whether they are true or false.

Is it bad? Now you know new things including that you won't know everything but you don't know what you won't know. Don't you want to know how far you can go? Isn't that exciting? Yes, maybe a bit scary. But don't you want to take up the challenge?

Thank you! For comments / questions / suggestions: you can reach me on Twitter @mmcasetti and my website is www.planningadinner.net