Jump to content

  1. admin

    admin

  • Similar Content

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Thomas Royen at his home in Schwalbach am Taunus, Germany.RÜDIGER NEHMZOW/QUANTA MAGAZINE
      AS HE WAS brushing his teeth on the morning of July 17, 2014, Thomas Royen, a little-known retired German statistician, suddenly lit upon the proof of a famous conjecture at the intersection of geometry, probability theory, and statistics that had eluded top experts for decades.
      Known as the Gaussian correlation inequality (GCI), the conjecture originated in the 1950s, was posed in its most elegant form in 1972 and has held mathematicians in its thrall ever since. “I know of people who worked on it for 40 years,” said Donald Richards, a statistician at Pennsylvania State University. “I myself worked on it for 30 years.”
      Royen hadn’t given the Gaussian correlation inequality much thought before the “raw idea” for how to prove it came to him over the bathroom sink. Formerly an employee of a pharmaceutical company, he had moved on to a small technical university in Bingen, Germany, in 1985 in order to have more time to improve the statistical formulas that he and other industry statisticians used to make sense of drug-trial data. In July 2014, still at work on his formulas as a 67-year-old retiree, Royen found that the GCI could be extended into a statement about statistical distributions he had long specialized in. On the morning of the 17th, he saw how to calculate a key derivative for this extended GCI that unlocked the proof. “The evening of this day, my first draft of the proof was written,” he said.
      Not knowing LaTeX, the word processer of choice in mathematics, he typed up his calculations in Microsoft Word, and the following month he posted his paper to the academic preprint site arxiv.org. He also sent it to Richards, who had briefly circulated his own failed attempt at a proof of the GCI a year and a half earlier. “I got this article by email from him,” Richards said. “And when I looked at it I knew instantly that it was solved.”
      Upon seeing the proof, “I really kicked myself,” Richards said. Over the decades, he and other experts had been attacking the GCI with increasingly sophisticated mathematical methods, certain that bold new ideas in convex geometry, probability theory or analysis would be needed to prove it. Some mathematicians, after years of toiling in vain, had come to suspect the inequality was actually false. In the end, though, Royen’s proof was short and simple, filling just a few pages and using only classic techniques. Richards was shocked that he and everyone else had missed it. “But on the other hand I have to also tell you that when I saw it, it was with relief,” he said. “I remember thinking to myself that I was glad to have seen it before I died.” He laughed. “Really, I was so glad I saw it.”
      https://www.wired.com/2017/04/elusive-math-proof-found-almost-lost/
  • Forum Statistics

    61,655
    Total Topics
    114,352
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,501
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    didiervaissiere
    Newest Member
    didiervaissiere
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I voted your remark "sad" because it truly is. It is a meaningless non-sequitur with no relevance ... which you think is profound.
    • Maybe you jw's will get lucky and your hero Hitler will start ruling again.
    • Trump is a pugilist, fully capable of vulgarity. It doesn’t really bother me. In some regards, it is refreshingly candid. It is not for nothing that the Bible calls the political nations “beasts.” They behave that way—ripping and tearing at each other and indeed, at anyone who gets in their way. So I am not put off by someone who drops the pretense and carries on to call a spade a spade. As much as ones might like the facade of being “presidential,” and of respecting the “dignity” of fellow world leaders, ought they not produce results to earn that respect? The hospital operating room can expect awed dignity when it routinely save lives—conducting the most delicate of procedures. But if the results degenerate to indistinguishable from that of a butcher shop, surely that aura of admiration will fade. “Laws are like sausages. It’s better not to see them being made,” is the old saying, and it is the butcher shop comparison that wins out over the precision operating room. It almost does my heart good to see Trump brawling with his political counterparts as they do their utmost to preserve “dignity.”  Moreover, you would almost expect Jehovah’s (American) servants to see that. They don’t because they truly are apolitical. They follow politics hardly at all, and there is a fair number of them that consider even a comment about the topic as akin to ripping a loud one at the concert hall—it is just gauche—it is as though deliberately contaminating the soufflé with the street rock salt. The JW Governing Body works hard to keep the squabbles of politics out of the congregation and to safeguard its neutrality.  Keeping truly neutral is not easy. Geoffrey Jackson reflects on how (Australian) candidates of his youth offered dramatically different proposals regarding the military draft—a matter that would affect him greatly. Updating his struggle to the present—adapting it to brothers today who might be personally advantaged or disadvantaged by the proposals of a given political figure—he ventured on how some might truly strive to be neutral and yet in the back of their head was the thought: “I hope that idiot doesn’t come into power.” He said it about two years ago. It is impossible for me not to wonder what “idiot”—if there was one—he had in mind.  Of course, Witnesses are politically neutral due to their advocacy for God’s kingdom—the one of the Sermon on the Mount—“thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” “God’s will is done in heaven,” I tell the householder as I glance upward. “I mean, I guess it is—surely he has it all running smoothly up there—but it sure isn’t done on earth. Pockets of it here and there may be, but nobody would ever say that the world runs that way it does today according to God’s will. According to the prayer, we should not expect that until the kingdom comes.” Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t go campaigning for human governments because they are announcing God’s government which will tackle and solve the problems human governments consistently flounder on. If Witnesses today did reflect on national politics—and the particulars are replicated in many nations—they might reflect that Trump’s enemies are the “one world government” people of the humanist variety—180 degrees apart from the one world government of the “God’s kingdom” variety. They are the humanists who would rise above national boundaries to blur or even erase them. They are humanists who yet pursue the dream of the League of Nations, reinvigorated after WWII as the United Nations. A worldwide blending of peoples and their interests into one common government by man, incorporating whatever is the humanistic thinking holding sway at the time. These ones fully expect those of government (largely themselves) to be granted dignity in light of the noble task they have assumed—it doesn’t matter if praiseworthy results are slow to come—it is the intention that matters. The common working people know it is a crock. They see their own interests being sold out for the loftier “higher” interests of these they would call the “elites.” Their economic interests are tamped down. Their moral values are shoved aside. They are astounded, to take an example, to think that biological differences should not determine male and female, and dismayed to see the view that completely defies their common sense and all of recorded history take the world by storm under the new tidal wave of humanists. They don’t think these guys deserve any dignity at all, so when a photo-shopped Trump is bare-knuckle boxing with the CNN moniker (bastion of world-government think), they love it, and they also love it that the dignified crowd are aghast. ....To highlight the GB’s challenge in encouraging all to stay on the same neutral page, I wrote the following in No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash: “They just about succeeded in their mission to re-instill complete neutrality – they were alllmmoooost there, when along came the summer Olympics in Rio. On the second day of the Olympics, I mentioned to Tom Pearlsnswine in the field ministry that Hillary had worn a bright pants suit. “Christians are no part of the world!” he rebuked me. On the third day of the Olympics, at the Kingdom Hall, I told him that Trump had tied his shoe. “We must fix our eyes on Jerusalem above!” he said. On the fifth day of the Olympics, I dropped by his home while he was watching the games on TV. He screamed: “Look at that medal count, Tommy!” he shouted. “We’re cleaning up!”  
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.