Skip to main content

To infinity and beyond

I occasionally discuss books here, and one or two people have asked me to put something about one of my own - so this is a brief dip into Infinity, one of my favourites, with a free sample of the actual thing thrown in.

We human beings have difficulty with infinity. Philosophers and mathematicians have gone mad contemplating its complexity - and yet it is a concept that is routinely used by schoolchildren. In looking at infinity, I explored the borderland between the extremely large and the ultimate, from Archimedes counting the grains of sand that would fill the universe to the possibilities of a physical reality for the infinite.

What delighted me when writing the book is that the history of infinity was a surprisingly human subject. Whether it was St Augustine contemplating the nature of creation, Newton and Leibniz battling over ownership of calculus, or Cantor struggling to publicize his vision of transfinite numbers, infinity's fascination was as much with the characters involved as the maths they were wrestling with.

Perhaps best of all, infinity is full of paradox. One of my favourite paradoxes of infinity, covered in the book, is a simple mathematical structure called Gabriel's Horn. It has the bizarre property of having a finite volume, but an infinite surface area. You can fill the whole thing up with just pi units of paint... but you can never finish painting the outside.

I've uploaded the first two chapters of the book so you can read it for free. Or if you'd like to read more you can find the book at Amazon.co.uk and at Amazon.com.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Mirror, mirror

A little while ago I had the pleasure of giving a talk at the Royal Institution in London - arguably the greatest location for science communication in the UK. At one point in the talk, I put this photograph on the screen, which for some reason caused some amusement in the audience. But the photo was illustrating a serious point: the odd nature of mirror reflections. I remember back at school being puzzled by a challenge from one of our teachers - why does a mirror swap left and right, but not top and bottom? Clearly there's nothing special about the mirror itself in that direction - if there were, rotating the mirror would change the image. The most immediately obvious 'special' thing about the horizontal direction is that the observer has two eyes oriented in that direction - but it's not as if things change if you close one eye. In reality, the distinction is much more interesting - we fool ourselves into thinking that the image behind the mirror is what's on ou