Skip to main content

The Mathematics Lover's Companion - Edward Scheinerman ****

The worrying thing about this title is that I'm not sure I am a maths lover. I find some parts of mathematics interesting - infinity and probability, for example - but a lot of it is just a means to an end for me. The good news is that, even if you are like me, there's a lot to like here, though you may find yourself skipping through some parts.

Edward Scheinerman takes us through 23 mathematical areas, so should you find a particular one doesn't work for you, it's easy enough to move onto another that does. Sometimes it wasn't the obvious ones that intrigued - where I found the section on infinity, for example, a little underwhelming, I really enjoyed the section on factorials. The book opens with prime numbers, which while not the most exciting of its contents, gives the reader a solid introduction to the level of mathematical thought they will be dealing with. It's enough to get the brain working - this isn't a pure fun read and you have to think - but not so challenging that you feel obliged to give up.

Along the way, Scheinerman is enthusiastic and encouraging with a light, informative style. Each page has side bars (meaning there's a lot of white space), which contain occasional comments and asides. I found these rather irritating for two reasons. In part because it really breaks up the reading process - if it's worth saying, say it in the main text - and partly because (in good Fermat fashion) there's not a lot of room so, for example, when we are told the origin of the RSA algorithm in the side bar, there's space to say it's named after Rivest, Shamir and Adelman but not to say that Cocks came up with it before them.

Occasionally, as often seems the case with mathematicians, the author seemed to be in a slightly different world. He says that the angle trisection problem is more famous that squaring the circle - which seems very unlikely - and though he notes that pi day is usually considered to be 14 March (when written as 3/14) he doesn't point out it makes much more sense in the non-US world for it to be the 22 July (22/7).

A typical section for me was the one the constant e (like pi, a number that crops up in nature and is valuable in a number of mathematical applications). There were parts of the section that I found really interesting: I'd never really seen the point of e before, the compound interest example was an eye-opener and there's the beautiful e= -1. The two other examples, though, I did have to skip as they were a little dull. 

My favourite part was at the end - the sections on uncertainty, including non-transitive dice (where you can have a series of dice, each of which can beat one of the others) and equivalent poker hands, Bayesian statistics, how to have a fair election and a fascinating game (Newcomb's paradox) - where it seems that you should choose what's not best for you to come out best - were all great. It would have been even better if the election section had used terms like 'first past the post' and 'single transferable vote' to make a clearer parallel with real election systems - and the Newcomb's paradox section should have made more of the difficulty of predicting an individual's choice - but these are small concerns.

So will anyone love all of it? Probably not. If you truly do love maths, you'll know a lot of this already. If you aren't sure about your relationship with the field, the book won't all work for you - but that bits that do should be enough to show that mathematics can make an entertaining and stimulating companion.

Hardback:  


Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Great Silence – Milan Cirkovic ****

The great 20th century physicist Enrico Fermi didn’t say a lot about extraterrestrial life, but his one utterance on the subject has gone down in legend. He said ‘Where is everybody?’ Given the enormous size and age of the universe, and the basic Copernican principle that there’s nothing special about planet Earth, space should be teeming with aliens. Yet we see no evidence of them. That, in a nutshell, is Fermi’s paradox.

Not everyone agrees that Fermi’s paradox is a paradox. To some people, it’s far from obvious that ‘space should be teeming with aliens’, while UFO believers would scoff at the suggestion that ‘we see no evidence of them’. Even people who accept that both statements are true – including  a lot of professional scientists – don’t always lose sleep over Fermi’s paradox. That’s something that makes Milan Cirkovic see red, because he takes it very seriously indeed. In his own words, ‘it is the most complex multidisciplinary problem in contemporary science’.

He points out th…

The Order of Time - Carlo Rovelli ***

There's good news and bad news. The good news is that The Order of Time does what A Brief History of Timeseemed to promise but didn't cover: it attempts to explore what time itself is. The bad news is that Carlo Rovelli does this in such a flowery and hand-waving fashion that, though the reader may get a brief feeling that they understand what he's writing about, any understanding rapidly disappears like the scent of a passing flower (the style is catching).

It doesn't help either that the book is in translation so some scientific terms are mangled, or that Rovelli has a habit of self-contradiction. Time and again (pun intended) he tells us time doesn't exist, then makes use of it. For example, at one point within a page of telling us of time's absence Rovelli writes of events that have duration and a 'when' - both meaningless terms without time. At one point he speaks of a world without time, elsewhere he says 'Time and space are real phenomena.'…

The Happy Brain - Dean Burnett ****

This book was sitting on my desk for some time, and every time I saw it, I read the title as 'The Happy Brian'. The pleasure this gave me was one aspect of the science of happiness that Dean Burnett does not cover in this engaging book.

Burnett's writing style is breezy and sometimes (particularly in footnotes) verging on the whimsical. His approach works best in the parts of the narrative where he is interviewing everyone from Charlotte Church to a stand-up comedian and various professors on aspects of happiness. We get to see the relevance of home and familiarity, other people, love (and sex), humour and more, always tying the observations back to the brain.

In a way, Burnett sets himself up to fail, pointing out fairly early on that everything is far too complex in the brain to really pin down the causes of something as diffuse as happiness. He starts off with the idea of cheekily trying to get time on an MRI scanner to study what his own brain does when he's happy, b…