"Why Doesn't Maths Add Up":- Documentary

[sjastro]

SBS 1 7.30pm Tuesday 8th Feb.

[CraigS]

So are we taking bets as to whether Alan 'falls in love' with mathematics ?

.. Interesting … is aptitude in maths prewired, or is it a leaned skill ?

.. or is this doco just for a laugh ?

Cheers

[sjastro]

I'd say elementary maths can be a learned skill.
Higher maths is prewired.

Regards

Steven

[CraigS]

I guess 'aptitude' in anything is prewired .. (I probably used the wrong word).

:)

Cheers

[mswhin63]

I think it would be a good watch, if anything; Entertaining

[avandonk]

As someone who is better at mathematics than football. It would be like trying to explain to me how a closed finite set of rules and time limit that governs grown men to chase a spheroid made of dead bits of animals over a limited grass field to supposedly enthrall the masses is beyond my comprehension!

Bert

[Rob_K]

Sorry Bert - it's already been done! It was called Nerds FC. :lol: There was a great quote in it, something along the lines of "I understand the mathematics of my foot striking the ball and the trajectory of the ball into the net, but my body just doesn't seem to be able to do it".

Cheers -

[leon]

I'm with you on that one Bert, football, well what do you say, :shrug:the words have escaped me.:question:

Leon :thumbsup:

[Waxing_Gibbous]

Looking forward to this!
Invariably doccos dumb things down or get something wrong, so instead of my yelling at the telly over something-or-other, it can be Carron's turn.
She's got an PHd in Pure Math's (or something clever).

[avandonk]

I would imagine that to simplify the current problems in a coherent theory is that they would try really pathetic understandable analogies.

If the great unwashed masses get an inkling of the realities of the problems then it is a good thing.

I will watch and learn hopefully.

Hope being the operative word.

Bert

[CraigS]

Here we go …. for anyone interested in exploring the relationship between mathematics and nature …. try this Youtube, Nature by Numbers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkGeOWYOFoA) (3:44 mins).

I recommend turning up the screen resolution to 720p, as well.

A brilliant production, this one (in my view).

Looking forward to tonight's program ..

Cheers

[avandonk]

Why the Golden Rectangle is pleasing to the Human eye is because it is the rectangular shape that just covers the fovea. Or the best bit of your eyes receptors. The idiocy it is magical is just that. idiocy!


Bert

[CraigS]

Hi Bert;

Why should something which is shaped similarly to the fovea be pleasing to the human eye ?

Cheers

[avandonk]

You really show your youthful ignorance here Craig.

bert

[CraigS]

Steven: Apologies for the following divergence .. I'm hooked (again) ..

Well .. I've looked around for an answer to my questions on this. I assure all, that my question was a genuine one … and it was meant to have been posed with the utmost respect to Bert, also .. apologies if it didn't come across that way there, Bert.

Whilst I understand that the fovea is the most sensitive part of the retina, and is responsible for sharp central vision, it is not necessarily obvious to me, that an object of the same shape should be "pleasing", just because of this.

I feel there's more to this than just the optical properties of the eye. So …

There are other numerous quotes around supporting this view, also.

Whilst I'd probably be crazy to challenge 'the masters' on this, it is clear that there's a LOT of subjectivity and brain processing involved here. To me, there are lots of 'pleasing' shapes, and a rectangle is not exactly high my own personal list.

Then I read up on "Gestalt Psychology" and the 'Gestalt effect' ...


… well, this just isn't a straight-forward issue. Lots to learn here. Maybe worthwhile keeping this in mind whilst watching the doco tonight, also.

Apologies to all for diverting the thread .. (just for this post .. unless anyone is interested in taking it further).

Cheers & Rgds

[sjastro]

I'm partial to the Tractricoid, or a tractrix generated pseudosphere.:P

Regards

Steven

[M54]

Starting in three minutes!!!

[avandonk]

Nothing better than t_i_t_s. EH.

Bert

[UniPol]

This is good stuff

[CraigS]

Well .. overall, I found the doco to be a little superficial .. but what could one expect from a one-hour program, I suppose. 'Twould be great if they could've teased it out to say, a six part series !

I'm not all that convinced by the 'brain activation' scanning technique to determine the 'centres' activated within the brain. I know we hear lots about this in many of these documentaries, but I'm always left wondering … just exactly what are we really looking at when we see these fuzzy, coloured pictures (?) We seem to read lots into such scans, but are we looking at the cause centre culminating from undertaking particular functions, (like mathematical reasoning), or the effect ? (Ie: the aggregation point resulting from having undertaken these functions) ? :question:

I read a book once about the human brain and the author was a brain surgeon. He traced the history of the brain in medical science, and came to the concept of thought perhaps being distributed throughout the body .. not just a product of it being concentrated in the brain.

Anyway, I'd like to see more material about maths coming into mainstream media. The fractal craze and maybe chaos theory, were the last major exposures of it all, that I can remember.

Time to do it again ! Well overdue !

Cheers & thanks to all for this thread - very interesting!

[michaellxv]

Have to agree with you. The show did not come to any great conclusions and I was left wondering 'is it a series, when is the next episode'.

My wife and one of the kids watched it and it did generate some discussion which I suppose makes it a success. Thank goodness we can pause live TV or we would have missed most of it.

[avandonk]

You may as well say the 'soul' of a car is in the badge or emblem that it carries.

You are the sum total of all your atoms! Your whole nervous system is you sitting on dumb muscles and organs. Really!

All of the parts working together are greater than the sum of all!

Why do you think that in your least lucid moments your brain still protects your a_r_s_e!

I rest my case.

Bert

[CraigS]

Hmm …
So external electrical stimulation also improves performance in maths tests, eh ? …

Thinking cap makes brain waves in Australia. (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/thinking-cap-makes-brain-waves-in-australia-20110214-1asg4.html)



There ya go … next time I need to do some maths, I'll strap a 'TENS' machine 'onto me scone' … who needs a documentary to sort out this question ? .. problem solved !!

:P:)

Cheers

[renormalised]

Yeah.....what's the square root of -1.....WRONG!!! <throws switch> 10000V runs through skullcap :):):P:P

[avandonk]

That reminds me of the opening scene of Ghost Busters. An other charletan posing as a scientist!.

Craig you are still young and foolish. NMR scans are not any sort of definitive answer to any sort of questions. It gives us a direction. It is a bit like analysing a computer chip's operation by seeing where the heat is generated. It does NOT give an underlying mechanism. Other information will fill out the true picture.

You are misinterpreting reality.

Bert

[CraigS]

He got the girl though, didn’t he ? .. by ‘any and all means’ .. whatever it takes!
:)

.. You mean there’s still time for me to recover ??
:) :rofl: :)


I think they were using EEG brain scanning technology in the documentary as an attempt at localising and comparing neural electrical activity between the professor and the comedian, during a maths test. The low spatial resolution of this technique, when applied in order to seek the differences between two human brains under deep thought, would seem to serve little purpose other than to produce brightly coloured images for the cameras.

TMS stimulation in combination with MRI technology, seems to be the preferred method for detailed mapping of specific brain functions. This technique at least, eliminates false positives, compared with other methods. I'm not sure whether any of these techniques are used for any serious mappings of higher order brain functions, though.

The 'thinking cap' development may challenge my assumptions on this however.
[EDIT: PS - Correction - It wasn't an EEG they used .. they measured the amount of oxygenated blood flowing into areas of the brain during the test. That sounds even less indicative to me …]



.. or interpreting unreality, eh ?
:)
Cheers

[CraigS]

Just for the record, more info on the technique is here. (http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/research/nirs/functional_adult.html)

The person on the documentary who conducted the scans is Professor Clare Elwel (http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/~celwell/)l, PhD, Professor of Medial Physics, London Uni.
Interestingly, she's the Head of the Near Infrared Spectroscopy Group as well.

Cheers