counting to infinite

Factual Questions
21

Here is dictionary.com’s definition of irony.

I’m not sure I’m quite clear on the concept myself. Everyone always says that So-and-So didn’t use irony properly. I suppose that oxy morons are the simplest form of irony? Jumbo shrimp is ironic, right?

Anyway, I want to ask why you math people are so crazy about math. Sure, it’s exciting because it is absolute or whatever. Even if you don’t know the answer, there is always an answer. Hey, is it ironic to say, “This is an unsolvable math problem?” If that is ironic, I have probably stated an ironic phrase more often than someone who better understands both math, and the term irony. Is that ironic? To the point, you math people seem to be working towards concepts that will only be used by people far into the future. For example, complex quantum physics and mathematical items relevant to black holes are not really relevant in our modern world. I’m sure when we’re colonizing the farthest reaches of the galaxy (or the inner reaches, actually) we’ll need to know all about black holes. What drives math folk to explore the presently irrelevant?

22

Win95/98 used DOS’s “code page” approach to displaying character sets. In crude terms (IIRC - it’s been a while), it’s set to display 512 (in DOS 3, Win98 may be different) characters. The first 256 are ASCII, and the second 256 depend on the code page. Win98 has an internal API that converts Unicode to a usable form, but if your current code page doesn’t have the character, it can’t very will convert, can it? Switch to a code page that has aleph on it.

Off-topic, but important to 27% of internet users:

If you are going to keep using Win98, I strongly suggest that you download all even remotely applicable updates and MS tools and add-ins immediately. As of January 16, Microsoft will end free support ot Win98, so the Win98 patches and versions of programs like MSIE may disappear from their website. When this happened with Win95, lots of people were sent scrambling for alternate (less reliable) sources. Just installing the patches isn’t enough - save them to CD (along with a decription of what they do) for the next time you need to re-install Win98.

Of you’re thinking of upgrading, I personally feel that Win2000 (based on the NT architecture, with Unicode support) is FAR better choice than WinMe. WinXP might not compatible with your older hardware (It’s far pickier about drivers) and IMHO isn’t quite a mature as Win2000 yet, especially on legacy hardware

23

[ol][]It’s interesting.[]It’ll never be relevant someday if we don’t develop it.[*]What the hell does irony have to do with it? :confused: [/ol]

24

The fact that complex math theories will never be relevant if we don’t develop them is a pretty good answer. However, the idea that math is “interesting” is an opinion and not fact. This stands in contrast to math which is fact and not opinion. So, if a math guy says “Math is interesting,” this sort of goes against the personal values that led them to enjoy math in the first place. I mentioned irony because the PHB said that Americans do not understand irony.

25

Still waiting for evidence to the contrary…

26

Zoe probably was being ironic, but those less math savvy folk could have missed that, and Derleth brought up an important point.

27

Me, I count to infininity by googolplexes. :smiley:

28

I always thought the simple definition of a googolplex was 1 with a googol zeroes after it.

29

If you’re saying that mathematicians can’t have opinions, you’re just wrong.

30

I’m sorry if I made it sound like I think mathematicians aren’t entitled to opinions. I wasn’t really trying to refer to mathematicians, either. I was just generally saying that if a person who is into math gives an opinion such as, “Math is interesting,” then they won’t necessarily be the most biased source on why people study advanced mathematics. But your other answer was really good.

31

It is. 10 raised to the power of N is a 1 with N zeroes after it.

32

Actually, I’m not sure Zoe was really using irony. More like a brazen counterfactual. (Still funny though.)

**

No. It’s a perfectly serious remark that many mathematicians, scientists, and engineers make all the time in the course of their work (often while shrugging). In fact there are countless well-known math problems that are unsolvable.

**

Many of the concepts will probably never be used at all. (Shrug.)

**

However, that’s not one of them. Understanding quantum physics, and the mathematics behind it, is an essential tool of solid-state physics, among other practical fields. It might also have a bright future developing now in quantum cryptography.

**

There you’ve found a much better example of a field that will, very likely, never be practical. But the “blame” for this indulgent, impractical attitude would fall on the astrophysicists. Mathematicians don’t study black holes — not as part of their profession anyway.

Thankfully though, physicists often discover that mathematicians have already worked out the math that underlies their objects of study — sometimes centuries in advance, before any possible application was in sight. So, three cheers for the mathematicians, even if they toil in obscurity while alive.

**

If practicality is to be our only test for the merit of human endeavor, then we’ll have to abandon every work of art, music, and literature ever made, along with Stephen Hawking’s papers on black holes.

But not everything people do needs to be about the price of tomorrow’s beer. Some have an insatiable thirst for knowledge in its own right, regardless of its present or future use. Some have this thirst in mathematics, as opposed to astronomy or paleobotany, but it’s the same basic drive underneath. Or so I would say.

33

Here’s a list (not exhaustive)of special symbols in html

whether or not you see the characters depends on the software on your computer.

34

Nice list, MC. :stuck_out_tongue:

35

Boy, did I feel stupid, hovering my mouse over MC’s post, looking for the hidden hyperlink.

36

Bytegeist, you provided fantastic answers. Thank you. Honest, humble opinions are always best. I can confidently say that I better understand mathematics fanatics. I never thought of math as an art. Math more complicated than long division usually seems boring and fruitless to undereducated lads such as meself. Also, it’s not really fruitless when I consider the possibility of an Asimovian future.

37

That’s got to be the least exhaustive list of HTML symbols I’ve ever seen.

38

I am having one of those days…

http://www.avenue-it.com/html/extracharacters.html

39

Depends on the mathematician. A lot of applied mathematicians do.

However, it’s actually quite a good example of why studying things with no apparent use is helpful.

Firstly, peripheral knowledge. Knowledge of black holes may not be of direct benefit to us, but they are an area where our current theory of gravitation breaks down. Having a complete (or at least more complete) physical theory would be very useful, because it would suggest other options that were not at all obvious until we had the theory (for example quantum mechanics suggested things like semiconductors, and nuclear fission), and in order to improve upon something it is often valuable to study where it breaks. This is one way the study of black holes is useful - it allows us to refine our understanding of the universe.

Secondly, black holes exist (probably). They are environments which at the present time we simply couldn’t create in a laboratory, so observational data of them allows us to study the universe in ways we otherwise couldn’t. (This one isn’t so generally applicable, but does often hold).

Thirdly, how can we know what benefit knowledge has until we have it? Example. Black holes radiate energy. Suppose we could create small black holes, and feed matter in them at such a rate that the black hole’s mass remained constant. Could we usefully extract energy from the radiation? Probably not. But if we did then we would have a working way of converting mass directly to energy, which would be insanely valuable. The point is that we can’t know whether this is possible until we know more about them.

Finally of course, it’s because we want to. We consider knowledge of the universe to be a worthy goal in and of itself, and so pursue it. Sure it’s subjective, but what isn’t?

Actually, could you give me an example of such subjects? I was having an argument about just that type of thing earlier and I couldn’t come up with any examples.

40

Number theory is probably a good one. AFAIK, it didn’t have any applications before the twentieth century.