Last Time | Next Time |
The prime factorization will be the subject of next week's quiz.
Let's review those definitions:
An edge can even join a vertex to itself, which is called a loop in a graph.
Each time we add a new point (vertex), we have to connect it to the other points (vertices): so how do the number of connections grow with the number of points? We want a formula:
\(arcs(n\ vertices) = ....\)
To get the answer, we start with a table, and try to figure out the pattern (remember, mathematicians are pattern lovers!).
|
Let's revisit that, and start again with \(K_5\):
Let's use symmetry to solve this (symmetry is one of the topics that we're going to study down the road...).
This problem is related to another story, about a little boy who became the greatest mathematician of all time.... Carl Friedrich Gauss ("the Prince of Mathematicians").
The story is told in a different way in one of your readings (The Loneliest Numbers).
A strange side-note:
The French defined the meter as one ten-millionth of the distance between the equator and the north pole on a great circle passing through Paris (makes perfect sense to me....:). So the government put official "meter sticks" around the city, so that anyone could check their measures (e.g. a piece of cloth) with this "official" meter.
In Paris there is still one of the "sticks" (it's marble!) "standing" (well, actually it's along a wall at a bus stop in Paris):
So should we create marble statues of six fingers being held up, with a sign saying "six"?
Perfect matching: we will indicate the number six with something that yells "Six" to everyone. You can bring up "six" candy bars, to see if you really have six -- by matching them to fingers of marble....
But then we'd need a statue with seven fingers, and five fingers, and 37 fingers, and .....
Or we could just count...:)
|
|
G. H. Hardy | Srinivasa Ramanujan |
Other numbers seem very gregarious; they play well with other numbers (e.g. 6, which seems particular friendly with 2 and 3; or 12, which has lots of friends: 2,3,4,6!).
But how can we understand "6" without understanding "5" as well? (and thus 4, 3, 2, 1,...0?) We'll discover that 0 was pretty hard to understand from early on!
Hardy reported this exchange between himself and Ramanujan:
'I remember once going to see him when he was ill at Putney. I had ridden in taxi cab number 1729 and remarked that the number seemed to me rather a dull one, and that I hoped it was not an unfavorable omen. "No," he replied, "it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different ways."' \[ 1729=1^3+12^3=9^3+10^3 \]