> Math Latte
>
> Math Latte
> Branch blogs:
>
>     Sprint@Logic Computability & Randomness
>     Sprint@fuzzy math
>
>
> ===
> Math Fry Blog (q_math) on Twitter
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 2 upvotes by Vikas Kumar Pandey and Julie Prentice
>
> George Gonzalez's answer to Why do typical (commercial) resistors have
weird a value?
> 1 May.
>
> The Euler comic book
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Vikas Kumar Pandey, Jigyasu Juneja, and Julie Prentice
>
> Leonhard Euler - Ein Mann, mit dem man rechnen kann
> PS:  Letters to a german princess : Page on um.edu.mt
> 21 Feb.
>
> No you can't check convexity efficiently but
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 8 upvotes by Rashid Mansoor, Nihal Balani, Mohit Bakshi, Julie
Prentice, Sugavanesh Balasubramanian, Guy Baruch, Gautam Kumar, and
Jason Azghani
>
> A function in which variables are raised to integral exponents, such
as 13x^4 + 7xy^2 + yz — determining whether it’s convex is
what’s called NP-hard. That means that the most powerful computers
in the world couldn’t provide an answer in a reasonable amount of
time.
> But Parrilo and Ahmadi also proved that, for polynomial functions with
few variables or small exponents, convexity is the same thing as
sum-of-squares convexity, which is easy to check. (“Sum of
squares” just means that a polynomial, like x^2-2xy+y^2+z^2, can be
rewritten as the sum of expressions raised to the power of two — in
this case, (x-y)^2+z^2.
> http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/20...
> 23 Mar, 2013.
> Comments:
>
> Gödel and Primitive Recursion :wow
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 2 upvotes by Rashid Mansoor and Julie Prentice
>
> The basic trick to incompleteness is that we're going to use the
numerical encoding of statements to say that a predicate or relation is
represented by a number. Then we're going to write predicates about
predicates by defining predicates on the numerical representations of
the first-order predicates. That's going to let us create a true
statement in the logic that can't be proven with the logic.
> Defining Properties Arithmetically (part 1): Gödel and Primitive
Recursion
> 13 Feb, 2013.
> Comments:
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 4 upvotes by Srinivas Subramanian, Vikram Jha, Ankit Patil, and Julie
Prentice
>
>
>     Ramanujan died before he could prove his hunch. But more than 90
years  later, Ken Ono and his team proved that these functions indeed
mimicked  modular forms, but don't share their defining characteristics,
such as  super-symmetry.
>
>
>
>
> It was on his deathbed in 1920 that he described mysterious functions
that mimicked theta functions, or modular forms, in a letter to Hardy.
Like trigonometric functions such as sine and cosine, theta functions
have a repeating pattern, but the pattern is much more complex and
subtle than a simple sine curve. Theta functions are also
"super-symmetric," meaning that if a specific type of mathematical
function called a Moebius transformation is applied to the functions,
they turn into themselves. Because they are so symmetric these theta
functions are useful in many types of mathematics and physics, including
string theory.
> Ramanujan believed that 17 new functions he discovered were "mock
modular forms" that looked like theta functions when written out as an
infinite sum (their coefficients get large in the same way), but weren't
super-symmetric
>
> Mathematician's Century-Old Secrets Unlocked
> 30 Dec, 2012.
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Srinivas Subramanian, Vikram Jha, and Julie Prentice
>
> How many leaves on a tree
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscienc...
> 25 Dec, 2012.
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Sugavanesh Balasubramanian, Srinivas Subramanian, and
Julie Prentice
>
> 125th birthday of one of the world's best mathematicians-Srinivasa
Ramanujan, an Indian mathematician and autodidact who, with almost no
formal training in pure mathematics, made extraordinary contributions to
mathematical analysis, number theory, infinite series, and continued
fractions.
> 22 Dec, 2012.
> Comments:
>
>
> Sugavanesh Balasubramanian
>
> You missed 'FRS' from the wikipedia line :)
> 22 Dec, 2012
>
>
> Sameer Gupta
>
> actually meghbalika ghosh  is the source
>
>
>
> 22 Dec, 2012
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Manan Shah, Vijayakumar Ramdoss, and Julie Prentice
>
> Toby Thain's answer to How can solving a Rubik's Cube be framed as a
graph problem?
> 28 Nov, 2012.
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Rashid Mansoor, Vijayakumar Ramdoss, and Julie Prentice
>
> xkcd-style graphs
>
> xkcd-style graphs
>
> mathematica.stackexchange.com — Mostly thanks to Belisarius's
elegant wrapping, you can do h[fun_, divisor_, color_, at_] :=
Module[{k}, k = BSplineFunction[Table[fun@x + Rando...
>
> B
>
> I
>
> U
>
> H
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @
>
>
>
> Comments:
>
>
> Rashid Mansoor
>
> That's amazing!
> 5 Oct, 2012
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Hanif Jetha, Vijayakumar Ramdoss, and Julie Prentice
>
>
> Probability and Statistics Cookbook
>
> matthias.vallentin.net — Probability and Statistics Cookbook The
cookbook contains a succinct representation of various topics in
probability theory and statistics.
>
> B
>
> I
>
> U
>
> H
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @
>
>
>
..

[Message clipped]  View entire message
raemes <[email protected]>

Sep 27

to 48cew8k7d2y
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 2 upvotes by Vikas Kumar Pandey and Julie Prentice
>
> George Gonzalez's answer to Why do typical (commercial) resistors have
weird a value?
> 1 May.
>
> The Euler comic book
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Vikas Kumar Pandey, Jigyasu Juneja, and Julie Prentice
>
> Leonhard Euler - Ein Mann, mit dem man rechnen kann
> PS:  Letters to a german princess : Page on um.edu.mt
> 21 Feb.
>
> No you can't check convexity efficiently but
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 8 upvotes by Rashid Mansoor, Nihal Balani, Mohit Bakshi, Julie
Prentice, Sugavanesh Balasubramanian, Guy Baruch, Gautam Kumar, and
Jason Azghani
>
> A function in which variables are raised to integral exponents, such
as 13x^4 + 7xy^2 + yz — determining whether it’s convex is
what’s called NP-hard. That means that the most powerful computers
in the world couldn’t provide an answer in a reasonable amount of
time.
> But Parrilo and Ahmadi also proved that, for polynomial functions with
few variables or small exponents, convexity is the same thing as
sum-of-squares convexity, which is easy to check. (“Sum of
squares” just means that a polynomial, like x^2-2xy+y^2+z^2, can be
rewritten as the sum of expressions raised to the power of two — in
this case, (x-y)^2+z^2.
> http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/20...
> 23 Mar, 2013.
> Comments:
>
> Gödel and Primitive Recursion :wow
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 2 upvotes by Rashid Mansoor and Julie Prentice
>
> The basic trick to incompleteness is that we're going to use the
numerical encoding of statements to say that a predicate or relation is
represented by a number. Then we're going to write predicates about
predicates by defining predicates on the numerical representations of
the first-order predicates. That's going to let us create a true
statement in the logic that can't be proven with the logic.
> Defining Properties Arithmetically (part 1): Gödel and Primitive
Recursion
> 13 Feb, 2013.
> Comments:
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 4 upvotes by Srinivas Subramanian, Vikram Jha, Ankit Patil, and Julie
Prentice
>
>
>     Ramanujan died before he could prove his hunch. But more than 90
years  later, Ken Ono and his team proved that these functions indeed
mimicked  modular forms, but don't share their defining characteristics,
such as  super-symmetry.
>
>
>
>
> It was on his deathbed in 1920 that he described mysterious functions
that mimicked theta functions, or modular forms, in a letter to Hardy.
Like trigonometric functions such as sine and cosine, theta functions
have a repeating pattern, but the pattern is much more complex and
subtle than a simple sine curve. Theta functions are also
"super-symmetric," meaning that if a specific type of mathematical
function called a Moebius transformation is applied to the functions,
they turn into themselves. Because they are so symmetric these theta
functions are useful in many types of mathematics and physics, including
string theory.
> Ramanujan believed that 17 new functions he discovered were "mock
modular forms" that looked like theta functions when written out as an
infinite sum (their coefficients get large in the same way), but weren't
super-symmetric
>
> Mathematician's Century-Old Secrets Unlocked
> 30 Dec, 2012.
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Srinivas Subramanian, Vikram Jha, and Julie Prentice
>
> How many leaves on a tree
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscienc...
> 25 Dec, 2012.
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Sugavanesh Balasubramanian, Srinivas Subramanian, and
Julie Prentice
>
> 125th birthday of one of the world's best mathematicians-Srinivasa
Ramanujan, an Indian mathematician and autodidact who, with almost no
formal training in pure mathematics, made extraordinary contributions to
mathematical analysis, number theory, infinite series, and continued
fractions.
> 22 Dec, 2012.
> Comments:
>
>
> Sugavanesh Balasubramanian
>
> You missed 'FRS' from the wikipedia line :)
> 22 Dec, 2012
>
>
> Sameer Gupta
>
> actually meghbalika ghosh  is the source
>
>
>
> 22 Dec, 2012
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Manan Shah, Vijayakumar Ramdoss, and Julie Prentice
>
> Toby Thain's answer to How can solving a Rubik's Cube be framed as a
graph problem?
> 28 Nov, 2012.
> Comments:
>
>
> Vijayakumar Ramdoss
>
> I have gone thru book its good one.
> 18 Sep, 2012
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Samuel Martha, Vijayakumar Ramdoss, and Julie Prentice
>
> Rule of 72: An investment at n% interest will double in 72/n years
> 13 Sep, 2012.
> Comments:
>
>
> Samuel Martha
>
> I didn't get it. Can you please explain?
> 14 Sep, 2012
>
>
> Sameer Gupta
>
> In finance, the rule of 72, the rule of 70 and the rule of 69 are
methods for estimating an investment's doubling time. The rule number is
divided by the interest percentage per period to obtain the approximate
number of periods (usually years) required for doubling. Although
scientific calculators and spreadsheet programs have functions to find
the accurate doubling time, the rules are useful for mental calculations
and when only a basic calculator is available.[1]
> These rules apply to exponential growth and are therefore used for
compound interest as opposed to simple interest calculations. They can
also be used for decay to obtain a halving time. The choice of number is
mostly a matter of preference, 69 is more accurate for continuous
compounding, while 72 works well in common interest situations and is
more easily divisible.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rul...
>
>
>
> 14 Sep, 2012
>
> Post
> Sameer Gupta, I * I^{-1} won't give a monad
> 3 upvotes by Changqi Cai, Sugavanesh Balasubramanian, and Julie
Prentice
>
>
> Solving It Like A Mathematician
>
> peterrowlett.net — 'Solving it like a mathematician 2012' was a
stall at the Big Bang East Midlands STEM Festival on 28th June 2012.
>

You are viewing proxied material from sdf.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.