Friday, January 11, 2013

Child's eyes

What do you see?
Can you tell me?

What's all around us?
Can you tell me?

I know it must be great.

Can you put your foot
behind your head?

Let's jump and shout
around, then run
for an ice cream.

Tell me son,
did you like it?

You can't tell,
but I see your
wide eyes

Sure, it's awesome.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Euler product formula

The Euler product formula can be used to calculate the asymptotic probability that s randomly selected integers are set-wise coprime. Intuitively, the probability that any single number is divisible by a prime (or any integer), p is 1/p.

Hence the probability that s numbers are all divisible by this prime is 1/p^s, and the probability that at least one of them is not is 1 − 1/p^s. Now, for distinct primes, these divisibility events are mutually independent because the candidate divisors are coprime (a number is divisible by coprime divisors n and m if and only if it is divisible by nm, an event which occurs with probability 1/(nm).)

Thus the asymptotic probability that s numbers are coprime is given by a product over all primes,

Gamma, the Euler–Mascheroni constant.

Gamma, the Euler–Mascheroni constant. 

The number γ has not been proved algebraic or transcendental. In fact, it is not even known whether γ is irrational. Continued fraction analysis reveals that if γ is rational, its denominator must be greater than 10242080. The ubiquity of γ revealed by the large number of equations makes the irrationality of γ a major open question in mathematics.

Monday, January 2, 2012

Experience and consciousness are largely unrelated

We owe a lot to the rationalists of the eighteen century. In particular to Descartes and his "cogito ergo sum". Still I would like to set asides catchy phrases and concentrate a bit more on the notion of experience. Experience could be defined as simply as preserving for a given period of time the effect of an factor. Preserving somehow the producing event, in any form, can be regarded as experience. Western civilization poses a great deal on the individual and the centrality of the man as the subject and the actor of the experience. But if experience is just sharing on something we have felt and kept inside, i like to think that seashells have quietly experienced the miracle of the sea, and they are happy to tell us this story every time we put them next to our hears.

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Love and death

The question is,
have I learned anything about life?

Only that human beings
are divided into mind and body.

The mind embraces all the nobler
aspirations, like poetry and philosophy,
but the body has all the fun.

The important thing, I think,
is not to be bitter.

You know, if it turns out that there
is a God, I don't think that he's evil.
I think the worst you can say about him
is that basically he's an underachiever.

After all, you know,
there are worse things in life than death.

If you've ever spent an evening
with an insurance salesman,
you know exactly what I mean.

The key here, I think,
is to not think of death as an end,
but think of it more as a very effective
way of cutting down on your expenses.

Regarding love...
You know, what can you say?

It's not the quantity
of your sexual relations that count.

It's the quality.

On the other hand, if the quantity
drops below once every eight months,
I would definitely look into it.

Well, that's about it for me, folks.

Thanks to Woody Allen to put it into words,
thanks to the rest of the new yorkers for the field
experimentation and to provide evidence for the theory.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Can estetics be the foundation of analytical sciences

Dirac used to say that formulas must be beautiful and elegant. He was convinced that beautiful formula's have a better chance in providing an analytical frame for physical phenomena. I have to say that Dirac's equation is indeed very beautiful. As a side effect, it was the first equation to provide a theoretical framework for antimatter and it the first equation to join quantum mechanics, special relativity, and classic electromagnetism. Not bad for a beautiful equation.

We are the tools of our tools

A tool exists for the sole purpose of being used. Hence the existence of the tool implies an entity who uses the tool to perform a task. We, humans, are great inventors of tools but also great users of tools. In a way we depend on our tools. So our existence depends on those tools as much as the existence of those tools depend from us. So at the end, who and what is the tool?