Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday August 18 2019, @03:25AM   Printer-friendly

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984

Math Is Beautiful, Study Says

For some people, math can be a necessary headache. Yes, algorithms guide countless aspects of daily life. There are tips to calculate and hours to count. But unless someone's a specialist, they'll probably ignore complex math in any given situation if they can help it.

But Yale assistant professor of mathematics Stefan Steinerberger wants to challenge that perception. His new study shows that an average American can assess mathematical arguments for beauty just as they can pieces of art or music.

And he has the numbers to prove it.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course. But for Steinerberger and coauthor Samuel G.B Johnson, beauty is made up of nine separate components: seriousness, universality, profundity, novelty, clarity, simplicity, elegance, intricacy, and sophistication. They didn't come up with those criteria themselves, but expanded on ideas laid out in “A Mathematician’s Apology,” a 1940 essay by mathematician G.H. Hardy.

"The mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s or the poet’s must be beautiful; the ideas like the colours or the words, must fit together in a harmonious way. Beauty is the first test: there is no permanent place in the world for ugly mathematics," Hardy wrote in his essay, which meant to draw distinctions between applied mathematics, as seen today in computer science and statistics, and what he called "pure," or theoretical, mathematics.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Sunday August 18 2019, @01:45PM (1 child)

    by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 18 2019, @01:45PM (#881736) Homepage Journal

    I've always appreciated Schrodinger's equation in operator form. Something like E psi = H psi. (or is it L instead of H? I forget.

    As well as the relativistic version of the electromagnetic field equations expressed using differential forms: dF 0.

    Basing physics on the proper mathematical concepts often makes it more elegant.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday August 19 2019, @07:03PM

    by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 19 2019, @07:03PM (#882272) Homepage Journal

    Of course the elegance of these equations isn't just a matter of using an abbreviation. It's because the notation used has a substantial body of theory that makes manipulation of the equations in this form easier that the traditional form involving nontrivial arrangements of partial derivative symbols.