For me, math has always been kind of annoying. It's something I'm decently good at but have never enjoyed. I never liked it because everything past basic algebra would be useless to me in my chosen field of study. This idea of fractals changes my opinion on this though! It's crazy to see how math revels itself in that natural world. The fractals present in everyone's body is really something to think about when you look at yourself. It's also an interesting thing to see that fractals are present all over the world.
Previous to this talk I didn't really know what fractals were- more basically that nature repeats itself. This concept of mathematical self-organization in nature is fascinating. The way that many of the African tribes utilize it then is not at all surprising- with the intuition that it works in nature, which is eternal, there is solid proof that it will make efficient villages and other objects as well. This is particularly interesting in that it shows that the design of these scientific and cultural things isn't random at all. It is very clear that self-similarity is in our nature (literally) and thus many cultures have used it to improve efficiency and organization.
Clare, I agree that it is not surprising that African villages utilize the patterns of nature in creating their spaces. Nature in its self is sustainable and if you want what you create to be sustainable, it makes sense to model it after what has proven its self sustainability. I found it very interesting that the term chief was still used in reference to the leader of the groups Eglash visited, in spite of the fact he was referencing advanced mathematical understanding of the people with whom he interacted. The primary thought that transversed my mind as I listened to the talk was in regards to Eglash's comment that people said that fractals weren't invented when African people were building so they were not building with the mathematical concept in mind. It appears that if the people were building in such patterns, then the mathematical concept of the pattern must have existed in the minds of some people, which constitutes the existence of the concept, even if people of European decent had not yet considered or understood the concept. I think this talk ties back to perspective in that we see certain things the way in which our society has trained us to view them, and it is extremely hard for us to change our perception even when there is a reality telling us otherwise, staring us straight in the face.
Mathematics were invented by man... Do you really believe, Clare, that mindless organisms in nature could obey the laws of man? What if, instead of the numeral system, we used the base 16 hexadecimal system? Would a joule actually equal the line integral of the dot product of force and infinitesimal displacement.
Miss Linda, I'm actually agreeing with Natasha about the fact that the patterns of nature were utilized by African villages in their designs. What I'm trying to say is that the video fails to point out the fact that solid and hard mathematics were created by humans. The understanding of mathematics, and fractals for that matter, could be held by those who've never encountered them before, but the overall calculation of math is impossible without a set of common understandings, such as 1+1=2 instead of 1+1=3, which could be true in another reality if we defined it so that way.
This post demonstrates the incorporation of subconscious observation of natural patterns into new structures and laws. In order to create a more perfect society, African tribes essentially replicated the pattern creation observed in nature, which governs the creation of varied objects such as leaves or lungs. What is most interesting to me, however, is that albeit the pattern creation process remained relatively constant, many changes are present in the basic structure of these patterns (such as lines, circles, and so forth). This is akin to a chemical polymerization process, in which individual structures (called monomers) bond with one another to form macrostructures (polymers). Variations therefore occur based not on how these units are organized, but rather on the starting unit itself. In many ways, the resulting structure is defined based on its first unit.
The initial proof in this video blew my mind too. With that being said, I think fractals are extremely cool. I've seen videos before about fractals being used in animation to animate extremely real scenery (I tried to find the video on Youtube but I wasn't able to). I also thought that all of the fractals in African villages was very cool. As he said, I would have expected all of this to be intuitive but the fact that there were actually algorithms being used was amazing to me. The fact that, without using any math, they figured out how to build fences to keep out the wind that best used the builder's time as well as resources was really cool. It's incredible that this pretty much matched exactly the windspeed vs. height curve.
as natasha insinuates above, perhaps that we are oblivious to another way of recognizing math if it does not fit our contemporary definition? perhaps there are other ways of knowing the same thing?
For me, math has always been kind of annoying. It's something I'm decently good at but have never enjoyed. I never liked it because everything past basic algebra would be useless to me in my chosen field of study. This idea of fractals changes my opinion on this though! It's crazy to see how math revels itself in that natural world. The fractals present in everyone's body is really something to think about when you look at yourself. It's also an interesting thing to see that fractals are present all over the world.
ReplyDeletePrevious to this talk I didn't really know what fractals were- more basically that nature repeats itself. This concept of mathematical self-organization in nature is fascinating. The way that many of the African tribes utilize it then is not at all surprising- with the intuition that it works in nature, which is eternal, there is solid proof that it will make efficient villages and other objects as well. This is particularly interesting in that it shows that the design of these scientific and cultural things isn't random at all. It is very clear that self-similarity is in our nature (literally) and thus many cultures have used it to improve efficiency and organization.
ReplyDeleteClare,
DeleteI agree that it is not surprising that African villages utilize the patterns of nature in creating their spaces. Nature in its self is sustainable and if you want what you create to be sustainable, it makes sense to model it after what has proven its self sustainability. I found it very interesting that the term chief was still used in reference to the leader of the groups Eglash visited, in spite of the fact he was referencing advanced mathematical understanding of the people with whom he interacted. The primary thought that transversed my mind as I listened to the talk was in regards to Eglash's comment that people said that fractals weren't invented when African people were building so they were not building with the mathematical concept in mind. It appears that if the people were building in such patterns, then the mathematical concept of the pattern must have existed in the minds of some people, which constitutes the existence of the concept, even if people of European decent had not yet considered or understood the concept. I think this talk ties back to perspective in that we see certain things the way in which our society has trained us to view them, and it is extremely hard for us to change our perception even when there is a reality telling us otherwise, staring us straight in the face.
touche'
DeleteMathematics were invented by man... Do you really believe, Clare, that mindless organisms in nature could obey the laws of man? What if, instead of the numeral system, we used the base 16 hexadecimal system? Would a joule actually equal the line integral of the dot product of force and infinitesimal displacement.
Deletehuh?
DeleteMiss Linda, I'm actually agreeing with Natasha about the fact that the patterns of nature were utilized by African villages in their designs. What I'm trying to say is that the video fails to point out the fact that solid and hard mathematics were created by humans. The understanding of mathematics, and fractals for that matter, could be held by those who've never encountered them before, but the overall calculation of math is impossible without a set of common understandings, such as 1+1=2 instead of 1+1=3, which could be true in another reality if we defined it so that way.
DeleteThis post demonstrates the incorporation of subconscious observation of natural patterns into new structures and laws. In order to create a more perfect society, African tribes essentially replicated the pattern creation observed in nature, which governs the creation of varied objects such as leaves or lungs. What is most interesting to me, however, is that albeit the pattern creation process remained relatively constant, many changes are present in the basic structure of these patterns (such as lines, circles, and so forth). This is akin to a chemical polymerization process, in which individual structures (called monomers) bond with one another to form macrostructures (polymers). Variations therefore occur based not on how these units are organized, but rather on the starting unit itself. In many ways, the resulting structure is defined based on its first unit.
ReplyDeleteThe initial proof in this video blew my mind too. With that being said, I think fractals are extremely cool. I've seen videos before about fractals being used in animation to animate extremely real scenery (I tried to find the video on Youtube but I wasn't able to). I also thought that all of the fractals in African villages was very cool. As he said, I would have expected all of this to be intuitive but the fact that there were actually algorithms being used was amazing to me. The fact that, without using any math, they figured out how to build fences to keep out the wind that best used the builder's time as well as resources was really cool. It's incredible that this pretty much matched exactly the windspeed vs. height curve.
ReplyDeleteas natasha insinuates above, perhaps that we are oblivious to another way of recognizing math if it does not fit our contemporary definition? perhaps there are other ways of knowing the same thing?
ReplyDelete