HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: DUENTSCH@dosuni1.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de
Subject: Re: FAREY
Organization: University of Osnabrueck, FRG
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 07:41:50 GMT

In article <98687@bu.edu>
rehman@math.bu.edu (Naved Rehman) writes:
 
>are there any applications of FAREY SEQUENCE?
 
Look into: Schroeder's book, approximate title: Number Theory in Science
and Communications, Springer Verlag. There may be what you want.
 
Ivo Duentsch, duentsch@dosuni1.bitnet
From: hanche@ams.sunysb.edu (Harald Hanche-Olsen)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Raising Complex Numbers To A Complex Power...
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:10:26 GMT
Organization: University at Stony Brook, NY

>>>>> On 14 Oct 92 12:28:13 GMT, cd2d+@andrew.cmu.edu (Christopher Paul Diehl) said:
Chris> Article-I.D.: andrew.wer8=RK00UhBQ4C1JT

Chris> Could someone explain how to compute (a+bi)^(c+di)?  Thanks for
Chris> your help...

(a+bi)^(c+di)=exp[(c+di) log(a+bi)], where log(a+bi)=log(|a+bi|)+i arg(a+bi).

The argument arg(a+bi) is of course only determined up to an integer
multiple of 2 pi, which means there are (usually) infinitely many
answers.  This might motivate you to learn about branch points and
Riemann surfaces, if you are inclined towards mathematical adventure.

- Harald
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: mstoecke@AFIT.AF.MIL (Michael G. Stoecker)
Subject: Re: Well-known people who majored in math (other than mathematicians)
Organization: Air Force Institue of Technology, WPAFB OH
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 11:06:04 GMT

In article <michaelg.719166404@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> michaelg@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Michael Greenwald) writes:
>From: michaelg@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Michael Greenwald)
>Subject: Re: Well-known people who majored in math (other than mathematicians)
>Date: 15 Oct 92 16:26:44 GMT

>In sci.math edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) writes:

>>In article <92288.113616RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>>>could someone at columbia go to the library and look up what art
>>>garfunkel's doctoral thesis was on? i'd be very interested.
>>>

>>CLIO, Columbia's library listings accessible from the internet, does
>>not list it.  Perhpas CLIO only goes back to a certain date...

>Or perhaps Garfunkle didn't get a PhD?  When I was in high school, I
>had heard that he had been a high school math teacher, but never heard
>any PhD stories.

>On some sheet music (or maybe it was a record liner from one of the
>albums?) I recall a picture of Garfunkle in front of a blackboard.  I
>think it was an elementary geometry proof, but he was pointing at some
>non-sequitors in one of the steps.  I think it said something like
>"All that glitters is not gold".  I don't remember the details.  

>I'm sceptical about the PhD story, since I think they were essentially
>doing folk music full time pretty soon after college, so unless he
>were a Wunderkind, there wouldn't have been much time for a PhD.

>Of course, I've been wrong before, and this should be easy to look up...

I recall a story in Sports Illustrated (I think) within the last few years
about Art Garfunkel "walking" across America.  I think it mentioned an
advanced degree (beyond B.S.), but I don't recall what degree and in what
discipline.  He has had plenty of leisure since his heyday with Paul Simon
to complete a degree or two.

Mike
Xref: sparky sci.math:13150 rec.music.classical:14223
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: sci.math,rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: P.Glass and math? [Re: famous non-mathematicians who majored in math]
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:09:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: Princeto.1992Oct14.030905.2242
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Oct13.223043.16366@husc3.harvard.edu> elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.202553.7542@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
>lawton%ecfa@jesnic.jsc.nasa.gov (Eric G. Lawton) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct8.191230.16442@lehi3b15.CSEE.Lehigh.EDU> 
>>buyskes@lafcol.lafayette.edu (Steve Buyske) writes:
>>>         So the question is, do you know of any well-known people who 
>>> majored in math but aren't known as mathematicians?

>>I believe Phillip Glass (the American Composer) has a background in 
>>mathematics.  Can someone verify this?

>I can't (nor refute it), so I'm cross-posting to rec.music.classical
>which as it happens has an ongoing Glass thread (fiber optics?).

Correct.  U of Chicago, Class of 1956.  

(He came back for a visit in 81 or 82 and played some excerpts from 
Satyagraha at a talk he gave -- I've described it here previously.
During an interview conducted while walking across campus, he
asked, baffled, "Where's Stagg Field?"  It seems he hadn't heard
of its demolition -- in 1958.)

>Meanwhile I note that music theorist David Lewin and serial composer
>Milton Babbitt got their undergraduate degrees in mathematics, and
>math figures prominently in their work.

Shouldn't that read "Serial composer David Lewin and music theorist
Milton Babbitt"?  8-)  8-)

Used to be, composers often studied law...

Roger
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.math.num-analysis,sci.math.symbolic
From: jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia)
Subject: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem Solved!(right...)
Organization: Tampere University of Technology
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 18:31:22 GMT


Seriously,

When I last time heard about the proof of FLT, an Indian
fellow was offering solutions for verifying purposes.

What happened?
Did somebody request the offered material?
I recall that somebody in Australia forwarded the e-mails
to the Indian guy as he had not connections to Net.

I would like to get an info on this.
(I also recall somebody asked the info from me, but
because I didn't get any info there was nothing to forward
 -- I have also forgot your name and e-mail address... :-)

Juhana Kouhia
=============
Vote for Clinton!!
From: kavuri@lips.ecn.purdue.edu (Surya N Kavuri )
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Do you know ?
Date: 16 Oct 92 05:00:19 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


  
  Can you give me a function on an interval [a b] which is
  not differentiable anywhere on that interval ?


Surya Kavuri 
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: Re: Barbie update
Organization: Fordham University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:17:00 GMT
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Oct8.041506.8739@galois.mit.edu>, jbaez@riesz.mit.edu 
(John C. Baez) writes...
>I just found this on another newsgroup and thought it might provide
>some more facts for our little quarrel about Barbie.

[some of article deleted]

>           Each talking Barbie utters four phrases, randomly selected
>during production from a list of 270. The idea said is to make each
>Barbie doll unique.

Why select randomly?  C       is about 216.5 million, so why don't they 
                       270,4
just make the first 200 million unique?  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard J. Nissim  (nissim@mary.fordham.edu)   
Disclaimer:  "I speak only for myself."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Subject: Re: Probably you know the probability ;-)
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 02:59:57 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.193802.25129@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> kavuri@lips1.ecn.purdue.edu (Surya N Kavuri ) writes:
>  I am given a "rod" of fixed length l. I took a hammer and
>  broke it into three parts.
>
>   (a) what is the probability that they form a triangle ?
>   (b) what is the probability that they form an isoceles triangle ?

There is not enough information to answer unless you tell us the
probability distribution of the lengths of the 3 parts.  In real
life this would depend in a complicated way on how you broke the
rod.
From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Barbie developments
Date: 10 Oct 92 15:52:02 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Oct9.194704.24314@informix.com> newswire@ap.com (Newswire) writes:
>
>          WASHINGTON (AP) _ In a development sure to raise the 
>temperature in the controversy over Barbie's "Math is tough" message,
>Mattel has acknowledged that a disgruntled employee has inserted a 
>number of contentious messages into several thousand Barbie dolls.
> 
> etc.
>

In a development sure to raise the temperature in the controversy over Barbie's
"Math is tough" message, it has been acknowledged that a disgruntled Usenet
reader has inserted a number (possibly only one) of contentious messages into
certain Usenet newsgroups.

The messages include allegations that Barbie dolls have been programmed with
political slogans and suchlike.

Thank you for your attention.    :-)

-- 
Gareth McCaughan     Dept. of Pure Mathematics & Mathematical Statistics,
gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk  Cambridge University, England.    [Research student]
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics
From: N020BA@tamvm1.tamu.edu
Subject: Math/Science Shareware-Suggestions?
Organization: Texas A&M University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 04:10:06 GMT

 
  I need to know you ideas on MS-DOS shareware for science and math.
The software would do things such as--
        (1) Solving equations polynomial, nonlinear, PDE and ODE.
        (2) Statistics, including time series analysis.
        (3) Spectral analysis
        (4) Symbolic math (factoring, integration and differentiation.
        (5) Numerical integration
        (6) Function and data graphing. (2-D, 3-D and contour plots.
        (7) Managing references.
 
  Reply either to N020BA@tamvm1.tamu.edu or to the net. Thank you very much.
 
 
========================================================================
"You speak evil of that which is fair    | My opinions are mine and mine
beyond the reach of your thought and on- | alone. I speak for myself and
ly little wit can excuse you."-J.R.R.    | no-one else.
Tolkien in Lord of the Rings trilogy.    |______________________________
Reply to N020BA@tamvm1.tamu.edu.         Stamp Out Political Correctness
From: cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Probably you know the probability ;-)
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:43:25 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <stephen.719167970@mont>, stephen@mont.cs.missouri.edu 
(Stephen Montgomery-Smith) writes:
|> 
|> It seems to me that one would break the rod into lengths (a,b,c) such
|> that all admissible triplets (i.e. a+b+c = l) are equally likely.

Well, with any plausible interpretation of the original problem this will
of course be true: they will all have probability 0. You will need to be
more precise than that!

|>                                                                   I
|> think that if you pick the break points uniformly along the rod that
|> you get a different distribution.

It is fairly clear to me that the intended distribution is the one in
which the two breakpoints are uniformly *and independantly* distributed
along the rod. 

Assuming this, the probability of the pieces being capable of forming
a triangle is 1/4 (not 1/8, as stated by Terry Tao in article
<1992Oct15.010724.6653@Princeton.EDU>, who had the right idea but 
must have drawn his diagram wrong). Given that they can form a triangle
the conditional probability that it is acute is 12 log 2 - 8 = 0.31776...
for a total probability of 3 log 2 - 2 = 0.07944... 

The probability of the triangle being isosceles (or right angled) is,
of course, zero.

Chris Thompson
JANET:    cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
Internet: cet1@phx.cam.ac.uk
From: broussea@DMI.USherb.CA (Normand Brousseau)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Book required
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:12:22 GMT
Distribution: uk,us
Organization: Universite de Sherbrooke -- departement de Mathematiques et d'Informatique

Greetings!

I would like to know where I can buy the following book:

       Birkhoff, G., Mac Lane, S.
       A survey of modern algebra
       Third Edition
       The Macmillan company, New York
       1965

       Library of Congress catalog card number: 65-15595.

A prompt action of your part would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks a lot!

Normand Broussea
Graduate student
Departement de mathematiques et d'informatique
Universite de Sherbrooke
2500 boul. Universite
Sherbrooke, Quebec
Canada, J1K 2R1
e-mail : broussea@dmi.usherb.ca
-- 

Normand Brousseau (e-mail : normand.broussea@dmi.usherb.ca)
Departement de mathematiques et d'informatique
Universite de Sherbrooke 2500 boul. Universite
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics
From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Subject: Re: "The Universe of MOTION" (crackpot index)
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 19:01:45 GMT

In article <Oct.15.08.35.20.1992.24954@paul.rutgers.edu> marlowe@paul.rutgers.edu (Thomas Marlowe) writes:
>I think that jb's otherwise praiseworthy index leaves out a few
>considerations:
>
>(1)	misciting of physical principles should be worth quite a bit,
>	especially:
>		the laws of thermodynamics
>		the observer effect and wave function collapse
>		the big bang, etc.
>
>(2)	quotes out of context, especially if reposted, are a real killer.
>
>(3)	citing of myth as scientific fact superseding observation (see Ted
>	Holden's postings on talk.origins; also compare Velikovsky and van
>	Daniken) should also pile on the points.
>
>i leave it to the esteemed author of the index to assign points for these
>infractions.  

I want the index to be easy to compute.  In fact, what I'd really like
would be an index that could be computed automatically.  Someone wrote
to me saying he might try to write a program that would catch some of
the more obvious signs of crankery.  It would be charming if this
program could be used to automatically rate each article as it appeared,
someday (see above).  Of course, many of my criteria would be very hard
to program in.  Your criterion (1) would be much harder: people have
many legitimate disagreements as to "wave function collapse," and even
some of the sillier views are not indications of crackpottism.  In
short, drawing the line is difficult here and I want something that
everyone with a crackpot index of less than 50 can agree upon.  (2) is
also true and I think I know who you are referring to!  This can be hard
to check sometimes, though.  (3) is good and should be added to the
"science fiction" category.
From: tordm@vand (Tord G.M. Malmgren)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Looking for fast methods of computing PI
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:19:04 GMT
Reply-To: TordM@VanA.PhySto.SE
Organization: Department of Physics, University of Stockholm -- Sweden

In article <1992Oct16.145024.14509@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson) writes:

>|>      Stoermer, 1896          3.168   Gregory(8, 57, 239)
>|> Here Gregory(a1,a2,...,an) is the formula pi/4 = a linear integer
>|> combination of the arctan(1/ai)'s, e.g.  pi/4 = 6 arctan(1/8) + 2
>|> arctan(1/57) + 4 arctan(1/239).  Note that both Sharp's and Stoermer's
>|> "improvements" weren't, showing what happens when you don't do an
>|> explicit complexity analysis.

>One would also like to know: are there Gregory(a1,...,an) methods with
>arbitrarily high bits/op? If not, are there any better than Machin's?

 there are arbitrarily high bits/op. There's a good article about this
by George Miel "An Algorithm for The Calculation of \pi" in some October
1979 issue of, I think, this Monthly(?), but I'm not certain of that. As
for a better version you could use

 \pi/4=12arctan(1/18)+8arctan(1/57)-5arctan(1/239)

 what you do is pick your 1/18, and then the rest is given by itself,
so just pick 1/128, and you'll have the rest, but you'll need a puter
that can deal with real good precision...




---------------+--------------------------------
 Tord Malmgren | InterNet: TordM@VanA.PhySto.SE | These opinions are my OWN,
               | BITNet  : TordM@SESUF51        | and NOT of this department!
---------------+--------------------------------
 Department of Physics, University of Stockholm
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: tordm@vana (Tord G.M. Malmgren)
Subject: Re: Calculating pi: help!
Reply-To: TordM@VanA.PhySto.SE
Organization: Department of Physics, University of Stockholm -- Sweden
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 11:20:18 GMT

In article <7557@charon.cwi.nl>, dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter) writes:

[...]
>But below you will find a short C program that will give you
>pi to 800 digits:
>int a=10000,b,c=2800,d,e,f[2801],g;main(){for(;b-c;)f[b++]=a/5;for(;d=0,g=c*2;c
>-=14,printf("%.4d",e+d/a),e=d%a)for(b=c;d+=f[b]*a,f[b]=d%--g,d/=g--,--b;d*=b);}
>It takes less than a second on a high-end work-station.

 very cryptic and somewhat fast, but it yields a somewhat faulty results
Pi:
3141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208
9986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081284811174
5028410270193852110555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678
The above routine:
31415926535897932384626433832795 2884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208
9986280348253421170679821480865132823 66470938446 955 5822317253594081284811174
502841 27019385211 555964462294895493038196442881097566593344612847564823378678
 where the empty spaces marks where your routine misses a digit -- format err?




---------------+--------------------------------
 Tord Malmgren | InterNet: TordM@VanA.PhySto.SE | These opinions are my OWN,
               | BITNet  : TordM@SESUF51        | and NOT of this department!
---------------+--------------------------------
 Department of Physics, University of Stockholm
From: cd2d+@andrew.cmu.edu (Christopher Paul Diehl)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Raising Complex Numbers To A Complex Power...
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:28:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.wer8=RK00UhBQ4C1JT
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Could someone explain how to compute (a+bi)^(c+di)?  Thanks for your help...

Chris Diehl
diehl+@cmu.edu
cd2d+@andrew.cmu.edu
Xref: sparky sci.math:13345 rec.puzzles:6789
From: hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (Dan Hoey)
Newsgroups: sci.math,rec.puzzles
Subject: Results: Unfolding the tesseract
Date: 16 Oct 92 22:57:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: aic.9210161857.hoey
Followup-To: sci.math
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC

Back in June, orourke@sophia.smith.edu (Joseph O'Rourke) wrote:

>Does anyone know how many distinct unfoldings there are of a
>hypercube (a 4-dim cube)?  I know there are 11 distinct 2-dim
>connected shapes that can result from unfolding a (3-dim) cube
>[Rucker, "The Fourth Dimension" (1984) p.34].

Well, Rudy Rucker did pass near the topic, but it was covered in
somewhat more detail in Martin Gardner's _Mathematical_Carnival_
[1975] article on the hypercube.  Gardner mentioned that he posed the
question of many ways there are of unfolding a tesseract to
_Scientific_American_ readers, and he got so many answers he couldn't
decide which (if any) was right.

I spent some time this summer counting them.  I organized them and
counted them by hand, and got 253 cases.  Then I reorganized some of
them, and noticed some cases I had missed, and now there were 264.
Then I wrote a program to count them, and came up with 261; I soon
noticed three duplicates in my hand work.  Then I compared the
program's output with my table, case by case, and they matched.  So at
this point I am fairly certain there are exactly 261 ways of unfolding
the surface of a tesseract into an octocube.  (And I am fairly
sympathetic with Garder's readers.)

Gardner noted that the eleven hexominoes you get by unfolding the
surface of a cube:
                                                                  x
     xxx    x     xx    x     xx    xx    x     x     xx     x    x
      x    xxx    x     xx   xx     x     x     xx    x     xx   xx
      x     x     x    xx     x    xx    xxx   xx    xx    xx    x
      x     x    xx     x     x     x    x     x     x     x     x

cannot be used to tile a rectangle.  I do not know if he tried tiling
with the twenty hexominoes you get if you add the reflections of the
mirror-asymmetric hexominoes and forbid turning them over.

As for the 261 octocubes you get from unfolding a tesseract, were we
to build them, it would be infeasible to ``turn them over'' into their
mirror images.  Therefore we would probably prefer to build a
rectangular prism from the 355 octocubes we get by adding mirror
images of the 194 mirror-asymmetric octocubes.  But I have no plans to
check whether that is possible.

Dan Hoey
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil
From: goddard@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Bart Goddard)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Mattel on women
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:40:24 GMT
Reply-To: goddard@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Bart Goddard)
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
NNTP-Posting-Host: g214-1.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu


I think our opinions depend on how we imagine Barbie's quote.  It makes
a difference whether she says "Ooooh!  Math class is sooooooo haaaard!
(sqeak) (giggle)"  (I don't type well in "Vallese") or if she peers  
pointedly over the top of her very-intellectual-looking glasses, sits  
forward and says, "Look, Football-breath, math class is tough", to the  
dumb jock who wants to know why she's too busy to go to the pep rally  
with him.  Since I haven't actually seen this Barbie.....

bart
From: hougen@vision.csl.uiuc.edu (Darrell Roy Hougen)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Another GRE question for you folks
Date: 13 Oct 1992 03:18:21 GMT
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
NNTP-Posting-Host: vision.csl.uiuc.edu

Given the discussion this question has generated, I would suggest to
the original poster that he write to ETS and complain that the
question is poorly worded.  GRE questions should not designed to be
tricky, ie., to depend upon knowing that the positive root was
intended.  I certainly don't remember having it impressed upon me that
the surd always implies the positive square root.  In fact, I remember
equations being solved by taking *the* square root of both sides.
There were invariably a positive solution and a negative solution.

Darrell
Xref: sparky sci.math:13052 sci.math.symbolic:2692 sci.math.num-analysis:2992
From: masjpf@gdr.bath.ac.uk (J P Fitch)
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.math.symbolic,sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Re: SymbMath: a system learning from user
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:19:38 GMT
Organization: School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK

While we are all advertising our systems, I thought that I would add
that there asre other algebra systems which can run on 286 machines,
such as REDUCE3.4.  Then when it gets too slow you can use the CRAY
next door, with the same program.
==John
From: is@groucho.dev.uga.edu (Bob Stearns)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Hyperspherical <-> Hypercartesian transforms
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:29:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1992Oct7.182933.4645
Organization: University of Georgia

Every one knows the standard transformations for two and three
dimensional data between circular and cartesian coordinates in two
space, and between spherical and cartesian coordinates for three space. 
What I need to find is the corresponding formulae for dimensions > 3. 
If there is a general form for all dimensions > N for some N I would 
appreciate knowing it.

References would be quite adequate. 

Thanks for your time and attention.

I will summarize to the net if there is significant interest.
-- 
Bob Stearns
University of Georgia
is@groucho.dev.uga.edu
(404)542-5110
Newsgroups: sci.math