there is nothing intrinsically valuable about art, except that its a means to pass time for some people. there is nothing inherently sustainable about that sort of thing
art schools wouldnt exist if art was only a means of passing the time
Mathematical beauty is the aesthetic pleasure derived from the abstractness, purity, simplicity, depth or orderliness of mathematics. Mathematicians may express this pleasure by describing mathematics (or, at least, some aspect of mathematics) as beautiful or describe mathematics as an art form, e.g., a position taken by G. H. Hardy) or, at a minimum, as a creative activity. Comparisons are made with music and poetry.
== In method ==
Mathematicians describe an especially pleasing method of proof as elegant. Depending on context, this may mean:
A proof that uses a minimum of additional ...
@Thorgott Are you saying "mathematics research should be funded by the taxpayer's money"? You're not saying its converse, I understand. But what about the statement itself
@MagnusAlexander Yes, if you don't know the history behind the piece you basically do not understand the piece. You're just gawking at it
@MagnusAlexander I like Erik Satie. I found his pieces only intriguing at first, I could appreciate and understand it a hundredfold better only after reading into the history behind his works
If you have $\alpha = -40$°, then $\alpha + 360$° is $320$°, you are back where you started and made the angle positive, which is what you wanted You would use + $180$° instead of $360$° though, why?
@BalarkaSen I am out of my depth, but if I had to imagine I'd say "discovering" math is akin to a physicist developing a theory except the physicist has to test it, whereas the mathematician just understands it to be true?
I just find anything that gives me aesthetic pleasure to be an art. It doesn't have to make sense, to have history, the only thing that matters is how this influences me, how it moves me, etc.
anyway, @BalarkaSen I don't know why there was a discussion on beethoven and contemporary piano but youtube.com/watch?v=YTPvBVJwBXQ this is a good piece not relevant to any debate. brb
The argument from beauty (also the aesthetic argument) is an argument for the existence of a realm of immaterial ideas or, most commonly, for the existence of God, that roughly states that the elegance of the laws of physics or the elegant laws of mathematics is evidence of a creator deity who has arranged these things to be beautiful (aesthetically pleasing, or "good") and not ugly.
Plato argued there is a transcendent plane of abstract ideas, or universals, which are more perfect than real-world examples of those ideas. Later philosophers connected this plane to the idea of goodness, beauty...
art is expression, engaging with art means dialogue with that expression, this dialogue can be informed through historical understanding, but that is neither necessary nor exclusive
Wondering about the following where my $f(x)$ is defined further down:
$$|f(x)-\pi(x)|-|f(x)-\text{Li}(x)|\approx |\text{Li(x)}-\pi(x)|~~~(*)$$
In the sense that the difference between the LHS and RHS is bounded by some constant $c<N.$
I guess my main questions are:
Can $(*)$ be proven?
Why do...
"Fomenko is one of authors of a concept that manipulates historical chronology. It is known as New Chronology. Fomenko claims that he has discovered that many historical events do not correspond mathematically with the dates they are supposed to have occurred on. He asserts from this that all of ancient history (including the history of Greece, Rome, and Egypt) is just a reflection of events that occurred in the Middle Ages and that all of Chinese and Arab history are fabrications of 17th and 18th century Jesuits.
lukas, there are parallels that aren't so cranky. e.g. a lot of stories of various figures in christianity have analogues in earlier stories about other deities, and some christian holidays more explicitly retcon pagan things. the added element is saying 'these things literally were the same' instead of 'one narrative somehow blended up with the other'
it makes a great deal of sense to me that a mathematician would be more likely to do this kind of thing than other scholars. in math you don't have more authorities than the axioms you assume. the axiomatic basis for assuming almost anythinig about history is nil
the only reason i "know" my own birthday is someone told me that's what it was.
My "favorite" example is Neil DeGrasse Tyson, who seems to think that his knowledge of astronomy makes him qualified to talk about biology and film criticism.
xander, it all gets back to the theory that i'm dreaming this whole thing, because there's nothing any of you could say now that you couldn't also say in a dream.
my impression is that he benefited from being in the right place at the right time in terms of what he was working on and where he came from. he arrived at the historically optimal time for people maybe caring about the kind of math that he did enough to give him good jobs.
@TedShifrin In the 80s, when my father was working for the House in Arizona, he was one of the lawyers in charge of creating the impeachment process to remove Fife Symington from office (the then current governor).
He wrote a really good paper on the topic, outlining how the Democratic strategy needed to be to establish a procedure at the outset, and not ad hoc everything.