<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cambridge mathematicians not yet wasting time completely</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/</link>
	<description>Dedicated to the mathematical arts.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Koray</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55138</link>
		<dc:creator>Koray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:48:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55138</guid>
		<description>They must have just seen the movie Aviator where Howard Hughes makes his poor meteorologist prove mathematically to the decency committee that his latest movie doesn't display more cleavage than other movies approved recently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They must have just seen the movie Aviator where Howard Hughes makes his poor meteorologist prove mathematically to the decency committee that his latest movie doesn&#8217;t display more cleavage than other movies approved recently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sigfpe</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55106</link>
		<dc:creator>sigfpe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55106</guid>
		<description>Dear PR People,

If you have a supply of high resolution imagery of acting talent, such as Jessica Alba and Angelina Jolie, available for close scrutiny, I'll find any correlation you want between any sets of features that will help to promote your products. You'll find that my consultancy rates are competitive and that my mathematical credentials will lend a degree of authority to your promotional literature that will significantly boost sales.

Thank you,
sigfpe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear PR People,</p>
<p>If you have a supply of high resolution imagery of acting talent, such as Jessica Alba and Angelina Jolie, available for close scrutiny, I&#8217;ll find any correlation you want between any sets of features that will help to promote your products. You&#8217;ll find that my consultancy rates are competitive and that my mathematical credentials will lend a degree of authority to your promotional literature that will significantly boost sales.</p>
<p>Thank you,<br />
sigfpe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isabel</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55105</link>
		<dc:creator>Isabel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:12:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55105</guid>
		<description>A good general rule of thumb is that anything using the adverb "mathematically", as in "it can be shown mathematically that...", will not be up to the standards of rigor of mathematicians.

I developed this rule of thumb in an inorganic chemistry class I took once.  A lot of inorganic molecules are highly symmetrical, and group theory can be used to study them.  Whenever the professor said "we can show mathematically that...", this would be followed by five to ten minutes of computations that he didn't understand and which rarely made sense either from a mathematical or from a chemical point of view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A good general rule of thumb is that anything using the adverb &#8220;mathematically&#8221;, as in &#8220;it can be shown mathematically that&#8230;&#8221;, will not be up to the standards of rigor of mathematicians.</p>
<p>I developed this rule of thumb in an inorganic chemistry class I took once.  A lot of inorganic molecules are highly symmetrical, and group theory can be used to study them.  Whenever the professor said &#8220;we can show mathematically that&#8230;&#8221;, this would be followed by five to ten minutes of computations that he didn&#8217;t understand and which rarely made sense either from a mathematical or from a chemical point of view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryce</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55103</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 14:44:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55103</guid>
		<description>I've heard of things in the physical world being "mathematically proven".  Well, mathematics doesn't work that way.  At some point they took an assumption from the field (I would guess psychology in this instance) and did a bunch of logical/numerical analysis from it and came to a conclusion.

Mathematics can say absolutely nothing about the physical world, it can merely take assumptions and produce logical consequences from them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve heard of things in the physical world being &#8220;mathematically proven&#8221;.  Well, mathematics doesn&#8217;t work that way.  At some point they took an assumption from the field (I would guess psychology in this instance) and did a bunch of logical/numerical analysis from it and came to a conclusion.</p>
<p>Mathematics can say absolutely nothing about the physical world, it can merely take assumptions and produce logical consequences from them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isabel</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55102</link>
		<dc:creator>Isabel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/09/07/cambridge-mathematicians-not-yet-wasting-time-completely/#comment-55102</guid>
		<description>I suspect that mathematicians don't realize we have that kind of power.

Also, somehow it seems wrong to use "mathematics" in the service of this sort of lunacy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect that mathematicians don&#8217;t realize we have that kind of power.</p>
<p>Also, somehow it seems wrong to use &#8220;mathematics&#8221; in the service of this sort of lunacy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
