Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque <wgd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 08 Oct 2008 16:14:44 -0400
Bart Goddard <goddardbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bill Dubuque <wgd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bart Goddard <goddardbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bill Dubuque <wgd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think most mathematicians are far more interested in
the beauty of mathematical objects than they are in the
beauty of the physical objects representing them
Which is why they're not in a mad rush to hunt down
every vague thread remotely related to whatever they're
working on. You can't enjoy the beauty of mathematics when
it's whizzing by at 90 megs/sec. The beauty is in the
enjoyment of learning and discovery. You're skipping
that part. Yes, you can get to the top of the mountain
and enjoy the view quickly and easily by gunning your
Harley up the trail. But the view at the top is only
a small part of the hike.
Why do you think that, and how is it related to this thread?
Yes, I know you don't get it. The Borg thinks everything
is irrelevent except utility. I can say the same thing only
so many times before I get bored. I'm essentially there.
Nowhere did I say anything like "everything is irrelevant
except utility". Why don't you answer my question and
clarify what you wrote above, instead of trying to put
words in my mouth.
But I did find it ironic that the guy touting utility
falls back on the "beauty of mathematics" for one of
his arguments.
There's nothing at all ironic about valuing the beauty
of abstract mathematical objects more highly than that
of their concrete physical representations. If you read
sci.math more frequently you would know that - perhaps
more than anyone here - I am a champion of mathematical
beauty (esp. essence and simplicity). I have no qualms
at all about sacrificing the physical beauty of books
if that yields an enormous gain in the mathematical
beauty that I can access and share. That this is possible
should be evident from that advantages I listed earlier.
Eliminating the static linear centralized straitjacket
of physical books opens up endless possibilities that
will lead to revolutionary changes in education and
the rapidity of knowledge dissemination.
Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
While you're cheerfully admiring the "beauty" of your
"neat rows of books on the shelf", the rest of us will
forge ahead and gladly exploit the many advantages
of ebooks. While you're admiring the patterns on
your bookshelf, we'll be admiring the patterns in
highly complex mathematical objects that we couldn't
dream of comprehending in a lifetime constrained
by the inefficiencies and limitations of paper books.
--Bill Dubuque
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- References:
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Prev by Date: Re: set theory is
- Next by Date: Re: Farmer Brown's conjecture
- Previous by thread: Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Next by thread: Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|