Math/Maths PodcastMath/Maths Podcast: Peter Rowlett in the UK talks to Samuel Hansen in the US about news & current affairs.

Peter Rowlett and Samuel HansenMath/Maths History Tour: Peter shows Samuel his home & its place in mathematics history.

railway display boardTravels in a Mathematical World Podcast: Mathematicians speaking about their work.

History of Maths and xHistory topics told from a maths point of view.

Institute of Mathematics and its Applications (IMA)
Find out about the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications (IMA).
I guest blog over at IMA maths blogger.

British Society for the History of Mathematics (BSHM)
Find out about the British Society for the History of Mathematics (BSHM).

Monday, 28 February 2011

Samuel Hansen's Big Week of Podcasts

Recently, Samuel Hansen blogged*:

I am an overly-active amateur podcast host. This has been a huge week for me as far as podcast releases have gone, with a total of four different, and new, podcasts available to download this week:

The ACMEScience Podcasts

Combinations and Permutations Episode 62: Jeff Goldblum on a Tilt-a-Whirl

4 mathematicians sitting around jawing over chaos theory.

Strongly Connected Components Episode 30: James Grime

YouTube phenomenon and professional Enigma Machine speaker joined me for an interview

Sam and Dan and Buckaroo Banzai

I am joined by Dan Sai for the 1st episode of a new podcast and we talk about the ins and outs of the best movie ever: Buckroo Banzai

Pulse-Project Podcast

Math/Maths Episode 35: Why Math?

My co-host Peter Rowlett and I are joined by Ruby Childs to talk about the reasons behind why people study mathematics.

I am well aware that most people probably do not care about any of this, but I would love if every single person who saw this just went and listened to one of these episodes. Oh, and if you already listen to one of these, or all of them, I would be really happy if you reblog this and help spread my podcasts through the internet.


(* alright, I may corrected a couple of spellings. And added a little punctuation. But go listen to his podcasts!)

Sunday, 20 February 2011

400 words in 30 minutes on why I took maths further

Goal: 400 words researched and written in half and hour. For me, for practice. Corrections welcome in the comments.

This time I try to answer a question from Ruby Childs: "why did you study mathematics?" Recently we recorded a Math/Maths Podcast with Ruby as a special guest and we discussed issues around this question. Why do some people like maths when others don't? Why do people take maths further?

This is a bit of a cheat for 400words, because it's a topic I didn't need to research. It's all personal. I could have just written this as a standard blog post but I've set myself up to try to do this piece of constrained writing and, hey, I'm busy this week so two birds with one stone is attractive!

Ruby would like more answers to this question. You can contact her via Twitter as @RubyChilds or send her a message via the Ask me anything feature on her tumblr blog.



When I was nine, we moved house and school. I wasn’t particularly good at or keen on mathematics. Nine years later, I went to university to read mathematics. Recently I have been asked: Why did I choose to take maths further?
I recall moving into a small village primary school with the two boys in my year taking classes with the year above. The dozen or so girls in my year didn’t have this privilege. I was placed with the boys even though I would sit in the corner doing different work. However it sounds, I don’t remember this being a bad experience – it was simply that I hadn’t, at my previous school, covered the same material.
The headmistress, Miss Crabtree, was very keen on mathematics and though I don’t remember specific incidents I can only assume my enthusiasm for the subject from that age was from her. I seem have caught up well enough and, when we finished the primary school maths curriculum months before the end of school, Miss Crabtree brought out other “interesting material”. There was mathematics in these few months that we didn’t cover until the third year of secondary school.
At secondary school I found maths easy and enjoyed learning new topics. At GCSE I took three separate sciences. I was interested in science, too, but taking these as separate subjects unlocked a new mathematical GCSE: statistics. At A Level three of my choices were obvious – Maths, Further Maths and Physics. I chose Chemistry as my fourth.
Then came the careers questionnaires. I answered questions and the answer came back: Chemical Engineer. I did work experience in a local cement works and the university chemical engineering labs. Although it was interesting enough, I didn’t feel a proper enthusiasm for the subject. I decided to take physics instead, but still there was a bit too much messy lab work for my liking. I liked the logical structure and reasoning, which fit my way of thinking about the world. Eventually, and I don’t remember how, I came to understand mathematics was a valid option for university and signed up.
So why did I choose maths? I liked it, was good at it and the structure of it fit my way of thinking well. Did it fit my way of thinking because of early training from Miss Crabtree? Perhaps. In any case, this confused mixture of interest in physics and ability at logical thinking led me to prefer applied maths but do better at pure, and ultimately to excel at programming and go into a computing Masters degree. So that’s what led me to mathematics and what led me away again. Now, when something goes wrong or a problem needs solving, I can feel my brain starting a logical breakdown and I relax into mathematician mode, and I still like it.



Time: 27 minutes. 473 words. Performance: too many words. I feel it would have been easy enough to take the last few minutes to shorten it by amalgamating paragraphs two and three to a new paragraph of half their overall length, but I decided not to because I am trying to give as full as possible an answer to Ruby's question. This doesn't quite fit the "400words" idea, but it's my game and I'll break the rules if I want to.

Explanation. More 400 words.

Sunday, 13 February 2011

400 words in 30 minutes on sexy primes

Goal: 400 words researched and written in half and hour. For me, for practice. Corrections welcome in the comments.

With Valentine's Day upon us a seemingly appropriate mathematical topic is sexy primes. These numbers surely have some attraction to those in the mood for love.
In fact, the "sexy" in "sexy primes" is a reference to the Latin word for the number six: "sex".
Sexy primes are prime numbers separated by six places from another prime number. You may remember that a prime number is a number that can only be divided by 1 and itself. So 5 is prime because you can only divide it by 1 (to give 5) or 5 (to give 1). All other numbers divide into 5 to give answers which are not whole numbers. Try it: 5 divided by 2 gives 2.5 - not a whole number.
In fact, 5 is not just prime, it's sexy too. That's because 11 is also a prime and is six places from 5.
The next sexy prime pair? 7 and 13. Then, 11 and 17. Actually, that's the second time we've seen 11, isn't it? It's six places above 5 and six below 17, and all three are sexy primes. This means we've found our first sexy prime triplet: three primes with common difference six. The second of these is 7, 13 and 19. You can get sexy quadruplets too and one sexy quintuplet, but only that one.
A natural question to wonder at this point is: what is the largest sexy prime? The largest we know of has over 11 thousand digits, but is it the largest? Well, we know there are infinitely many prime numbers - Euclid proved this in ancient Greece - but the higher up the list of numbers you get, the rarer prime numbers are. The question of whether there are infinitely many sexy primes depends on the distribution of primes, and this is something we don't know. In fact, the question of the largest sexy prime leads us neatly to an unsolved problem called Polignac's conjecture. Alphonse de Polignac, a French mathematician in the 19th Century, made a conjecture in 1849 that, if true, would mean there are infinitely many sexy primes. However, 162 years later, this has neither been proved or refuted.
That mention of the year brings up another connection: 2011 is a sexy prime. That's because 2017 is also prime. Mathematics is an active field of research. Perhaps by 2017 we'll have our answer.

Time: 31 minutes. 397 words. Performance: not bad. I discovered my text editor was counting words wrong, so that "we've" was counted as two words. Sigh.

N.B.: @stecks suggested that we cover 'Valentine's maths' for today's episode of the Math/Maths Podcast. @axiomsofchoice suggested sexy primes. So this piece owes a debt to them for the suggestion.

Explanation. More 400 words.