This is the last thing that will have been written on this particular whiteboard! I’m moving to a new place, and today I taught my last lesson at the old place. I was teaching someone about diagonalization, which is more than an exciting enough note to go out on.
The role of a dictionary is to define unknown words by means of known ones. However there are terms, like left or right, which cannot be explained in this way. In the absence of a formal definition, material objects must be used to illustrate these terms: for example, we may say that the human liver is on the right side. […] Here we consider some cases where information cannot be explained verbally.
Alright guys, I’m going on maternity leave in 2.5 months. I have 8 students that are asking for tutoring recommendations. I have two calculus students (one is in AB, the other in BC), a precalculus student, a geometry student, and 4 algebra students (of various levels).
All of my work is remote, I use my laptop (for camera/logitstics real-time) and iPad (screensharing and showing my work while I explain concepts) only.
If you’re looking for remote math tutoring work, please DM me. All of my students have different needs when it comes to tutoring, so if I get to know you I might recommend you to a specific student or select group of students.
I want to be straightforward and say I feel really very protective of my students. Some of them I’ve been with for over 3 years! So please do not feel insulted if I don’t recommend you, and understand that it’s because my standards are incredibly high. Before I recommend anyone I’m going to ask that we spend some time on zoom together, where we’ll discuss your setup, your pedagogical beliefs, teaching approaches, etc.
I’m aware I’m making this sound like a ridiculous Olympic level tryout competition. Its just that I do take my work very seriously, and the well-being of my students is really important to me.
Hello again! Just bumping this back up, because while I’m still looking for people who are interested in remote tutoring work. My maternity leave starts in about 7 weeks so I’d really love to hear back from more people. Also, if you’re a mathblr/mathblr-adjacent blog, if you could reblog this I would be very appreciative!
TIL Newton probably didn’t know much about harmonic oscillators! The earliest known complete treatment of this system (after a groundbreaking first attempt by Huygens c. 1673) seems to have been in a 1727 letter from Johann Bernoulli to Daniel Bernoulli. The earliest published treatment was by Euler, presented about a decade later. Furthermore, there’s every reason to think that Newton, despite his discovery of several power series representations for trigonometric functions, never incorporated these functions into the calculus as such; it is again Euler who seems to have been the first to differentiate and integrate sine, cosine, etc.
I’m suspicious of just saying “I’m a talks learner, talks are better than books or papers” because its plausible that talks just give me the phenomenal sensation of learning without actually teaching me anything
I think this is true regardless of which one of these learner you claim to be (I know that reading an academic paper with hot beverage in hand absolutely gives me the phenomenal sensation of learning regardless of what I’m actually absorbing from it), so in either case you should have some external metric, probably
One danger of lectures, especially from a good lecturer, is they can make things feel like they make sense even without you having any deep understanding. Of course, this can also be done by good writers but it’s rarely done in textbooks. (Instead it’s done in, like, Malcolm Gladwell books, and we call it “insight porn”.)
This is the best resource for studying math that I’ve found in a while! It’s 300+ pages of flawed/incorrect proofs on topics including logic, analysis, and linear algebra. Each flawed proof is followed by a classification of its errors, and a corrected version.
Here, we show that rolling of wooden balls by bumble bees, Bombus terrestris, fulfils behavioural criteria for animal play and is akin to play in other animals. We found that ball rolling (1) did not contribute to immediate survival strategies, (2) was intrinsically rewarding, (3) differed from functional behaviour in form, (4) was repeated but not stereotyped, and (5) was initiated under stress-free conditions.
Many structures in mathematics are incomplete in one or more ways. …
… A fourth type of incompleteness, which is slightly less well known than the above three [algebraic, metric, logical], is what I will call elementary incompleteness (and which model theorists call the failure of the countable saturation property). It applies to any structure that is describable by a first-order language, such as a field, a metric space, or a universe of sets. For instance, in the language of ordered real fields, the real line R is elementarily incomplete, because there exists a sequence of statements (such as the statements 0 < x < 1/n for natural numbers n=1,2,…) in this language which are potentially simultaneously satisfiable (in the sense that any finite number of these statements can be satisfied by some real number x) but are not actually simultaneously satisfiable in this theory.
…[I]f one starts with an arbitrary structure U, one can form an elementary completion *U of it, which is a significantly larger structure which contains U as a substructure…. Furthermore, *U is elementarily complete; any sequence of statements that are potentially simultaneously satisfiable in *U (in the sense that any finite number of statements in this collection are simultaneously satisfiable), will actually be simultaneously satisfiable. … If U is the standard universe of all the standard objects one considers in mathematics, then its elementary completion *U is known as the nonstandard universe, and is the setting for nonstandard analysis.
@shlevy asked me a while ago, while we were discussing Gibson’s ecological theory of vision, whether it was possible to “see light”, in the sense of scattering photons off of something else made of photons in order to resolve some kind of image of the latter.
From the classical point of view, the answer is “no” - light is “invisible”. Maxwell’s equations are linear, so electromagnetic radiation doesn’t interact with itself. For example, laser beams in a vacuum will simply pass through one another.
But quantum electrodynamics tells a different story: above an electric field strength of about 10^18 V/m, aka the Schwinger limit, a pair of photons can interact via virtual electron/positron pairs, as pictured below [source], which allows for photon-photon scattering.
Belated update: it’s now been done! In 2019, the ATLAS team at the LHC reported a confirmed (at 8.2 sigma) observation of photon-photon scattering, following some 4.4 sigma observations in 2017. They did this by smashing lead ions into one another. Here are the abstract & pdf of the actual paper.