Why Further Maths?

If u ask me further maths is still for woosies :p:

BRING ON THE STEP QUESTIONS

*evil laugh*

Reply 21

Feria

2

At my mums school, you did 3 A levels unless you did further maths, which meant you did 4.. that was the only way to do 4... so alot of people opted for it X_X

Reply 22

Michael Mourao

If u ask me further maths is still for woosies :p:

BRING ON THE STEP QUESTIONS

*evil laugh*

STEP is for woosies :p:

Bring on the Millennium Problems :biggrin:

Reply 23

tribal_angel

2

Personally, I feel that further maths is much more interesting than normal maths. Although it is harder, I prefer it.

Reply 24

Feria

2

I have to agree, some things are alot more interesting in it

Reply 25

-G-a-v-

16

This thread was titled 'Why Further Maths?'

Why not? :p:

- Maths is too wide ranging a subject to have just one A-level in it

- Also, because maths is ace :wink:

Reply 26

RichE

STEP is for woosies :p:

Bring on the Millennium Problems :biggrin:

I solved the riemann hypothesis!

Reply 27

Michael Mourao

I solved the riemann hypothesis!

That's still leaves six others - don't get cocky - though you may be able to hire help with your first million. :biggrin:

Reply 28

RichE

That's still leaves six others - don't get cocky - though you may be able to hire help with your first million. :biggrin:

Interesting that Hilbert thought that the Riemann Hypothesis would fall before Fermat's Last Theorem and the proof for the existence (or lack thereof) of a transfinite number.

Reply 29

J.F.N

Interesting that Hilbert thought that the Riemann Hypothesis would fall before Fermat's Last Theorem and the proof for the existence (or lack thereof) of a transfinite number.

Yes, well, an achievement though Hilbert's 23 problems were not even he could predict the future. The Continuum Hypothesis I guess he was expecting a positive answer whereas the truth of the matter rather flew in the face of his "wir mussen wissen wir werden wissen" attitude.

And wasn't one of his problems "axiomatise physics" - which rather dates his attitude to things, true genius though the guy was.

Reply 30

J.F.N

Interesting that Hilbert thought that the Riemann Hypothesis would fall before Fermat's Last Theorem and the proof for the existence (or lack thereof) of a transfinite number.

have u read "Prime obsession"?

Reply 31

RichE

Yes, well, an achievement though Hilbert's 23 problems were not even he could predict the future. The Continuum Hypothesis I guess he was expecting a positive answer whereas the truth of the matter rather flew in the face of his "wir mussen wissen wir werden wissen" attitude.

And wasn't one of his problems "axiomatise physics" - which rather dates his attitude to things, true genius though the guy was.

Lets start a thread where we only speak about mathematicians and what they said or did in the past. It will be something like Chinese to other ppl...

Reply 32

Michael Mourao

Lets start a thread where we only speak about mathematicians and what they said or did in the past. It will be something like Chinese to other ppl...

Great idea, clearly mathematicians need to ostracise themselves further. :rolleyes:

I'm unconvinced - we might get to some nadir where even Cambridge Compscis could look down on us. :frown:

Reply 33

Michael Mourao

Lets start a thread where we only speak about mathematicians and what they said or did in the past. It will be something like Chinese to other ppl...

The problem is, how much math do we know? I've gotten to the point where I'm avoiding reading popular science books about math, but instead to start learning it. Its not exactly breakfast chatter, I tell ya.

Reply 34

J.F.N

The problem is, how much math do we know? I've gotten to the point where I'm avoiding reading popular science books about math, but instead to start learning it. Its not exactly breakfast chatter, I tell ya.

You've changed your sig

Also I don't agree with it - why is 2 in [0,1]?

(though obviously [0,1] and the reals are equinumerous)

Reply 35

RichE

You've changed your sig

Also I don't agree with it - why is 2 in [0,1]?

(though obviously [0,1] and the reals are equinumerous)

That's the point, sorta--that they contain the same number of numbers. In any case, its not that interesting. Gimme a second, I'll put up with something else!

Reply 36

material breach

12

RichE

You've changed your sig

Also I don't agree with it - why is 2 in [0,1]?

(though obviously [0,1] and the reals are equinumerous)

if you sum 1 enough times you can get any number?

Reply 37

material breach

if you sum 1 enough times you can get any number?

Nope, thats not the point. As Riche pointed out, its that they're equinumerous--in techie talk, there's a bijection between them.

Reply 38

J.F.N

Nope, thats not the point. As Riche pointed out, its that they're equinumerous--in techie talk, there's a bijection between them.

Is that a maths in-joke from uni?

Don't get it I'm afraid - and would say cohyperplanar if I was ever inclined to abuse English so.

Maths can come up with some god-awful terminology - I especially despise "compactification" and "circline"

Reply 39