Archive for February, 2006

0.203188

Tuesday, February 28th, 2006

In a “Computing Science” column titled “Rumours and Errours,” not quite a year ago, a leading role went to the nondescript number 0.203188. That number emerged from a simulation of how rumors spread through a society; given certain assumptions, 0.203188 is the proportion of the population that never hears the rumor.
A few weeks ago Paul […]

Taxation without rationalization

Friday, February 24th, 2006

I am the child of a bookkeeper, and I’ve inherited the habit of double-checking receipts and balancing accounts. My friends make fun of me when I carefully note down the dime that I put in a parking meter, but lately I’ve been fretting over even smaller sums—charges that come to less than a penny. It’s […]

Life after algebra

Monday, February 20th, 2006

Three weeks ago, Duke Helfand of the Los Angeles Times wrote a thoughtful article on high school algebra. A one-semester course in algebra has recently become a requirement for graduation in the Los Angeles unified school district, and many students are having a hard time with it. The Times article tells the story of Gabriela […]

Playfair’s Powerpoint Presentation

Saturday, February 18th, 2006

“To those interested in the effective visual communication of quantitative phenomena, William Playfair’s Atlas is like the Bible: an ancient and revered book that is often cited but rarely read.”
—Howard Wainer and Ian Spence
The Commercial and Political Atlas is rarely read simply because it’s rare. Playfair published three versions of the book between 1786 and […]

Zeroing in on zeta zeros

Friday, February 17th, 2006

Casual observers of the mathematical arts might be forgiven for feeling that mathematicians sometimes make rapid progress in the wrong direction.
For example, the concept of a prime number is simple enough to be understood by anyone who knows a little arithmetic. In order to explain the distribution of primes along the number line, however, […]

Bidirectional subroutines

Tuesday, February 14th, 2006

More on reversible computing.
If all it took to reverse a computation was stepping through a program backwards, there wouldn’t be much to say about the idea. In general, this kind of straightforward reversal doesn’t work. However, I have learned that a computer architecture outlined more than 40 years ago would have allowed such back-and-forth […]

Packed primes

Friday, February 10th, 2006

A few weeks ago I reported on two talks about patterns in prime numbers—pairs of primes that lie close together and long sequences of primes in arithmetic progression. Thomas J Engelsma writes to tell me of a closely related undertaking: The search for dense clusters of primes. Although we know that the average density of […]

A reversible eraser

Thursday, February 9th, 2006

Still more on reversible and zero-energy computing (see earlier bit-player posts here and here, and the American Scientist column):
M. Maissam Barkeshli of the University of California at Berkeley has a preprint titled “Dissipationless Information Erasure and Landauer’s Principle.” (The paper was first submitted to the arXiv last April, but I missed it then, and noticed […]

Newton and Notwen

Tuesday, February 7th, 2006

This is another loose end from my new column on reversible computing (now available online; also see the earlier bit-player item on swapping).
In the column I mention Henry G. Baker’s idea of reversing Newton’s method for approximating the square root of a number. Undoing the extraction of square roots doesn’t seem like much of a […]

Rediscovering America

Sunday, February 5th, 2006

In today’s New York Times (registration required), Gina Kolata writes on rediscoveries and reinventions in the sciences. Her essay is based in part on the experience of Rakesh V. Vohra of Northwestern University, who has discovered that one of his own results has been rediscovered at least 16 times. Kolata also quotes Stephen M. Stigler […]