![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Back to Work...
Jun. 17th, 2004 07:45 pmLast night, finally, we reached Descartes, the nominal starting point for Math 400. (Before that, I talked about Pascal's Mystic Hexagram, the effects of Jansenism on 17th-century science and literature, and the importance of gambling...) In terms of doing mathematics, Descartes stands reasonably high, but he really shines in terms of thinking about how one does mathematics. To name only one example, his invention of exponents is a marvellous example of the ability of good notation to, on the one hand, encapsulate a good deal of thought and, on the other, open the door to further innovation. That he also co-invented analytic geometry, broke the millennia-old obsession with easily constructible (in particular, straightedge-and-compass) curves, restored the autonomy of algebra from geometry, and brought the analytic method front and center in mathematics only enhances his position as, probably, the greatest methodologist in the history of mathematics. (Well, maybe Euclid could challenge him there...)
I've been - intermittently - reading A History of Brazil, by E. Bradford Burns, for a couple of weeks now. (It's my bus book - the one I read on my way to and from work.) Much of the first part of the book is kind of dull, I think, but I've gotten into the late 19th century and things have become much more interesting. The impact of the Paraguayan War on Brazil (and on Paraguay), the loss of legitimacy by the imperial family during the Second Empire, the abolitionist movement, and the like make for fascinating reading. (The Paraguayan War, AKA the War of the Triple Alliance, has intrigued me for a long time. In that war, Paraguay took on Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay simultaneously, and actually managed to hold them off for a remarkably long time. But it came at a horrific cost; half the population of Paraguay died, and 90% of the adult males. From the Brazilian perspective, it takes on a very different shape, and learning that alone would have made the book worthwhile to me.)
On the lighter side, I decided to reread the first two of Christopher Stasheff's Warlock books - The Warlock in Spite of Himself and King Kobold Revived. (I have read one or two of the later books in the series, but didn't keep them.) I don't think they stand up to rereading very well. Stasheff's attempts at humor don't integrate well with the (semi-)serious plotlines. Maybe it would work better if I could take it purely as humor (a la Asprin's "Myth" series), but he keeps trying to infuse it with more significance than it will bear. (Come to think of it, Asprin does that, too, in the later "Myth" books, which partly explains their drop-off in quality. Only partly, though...)
I've been - intermittently - reading A History of Brazil, by E. Bradford Burns, for a couple of weeks now. (It's my bus book - the one I read on my way to and from work.) Much of the first part of the book is kind of dull, I think, but I've gotten into the late 19th century and things have become much more interesting. The impact of the Paraguayan War on Brazil (and on Paraguay), the loss of legitimacy by the imperial family during the Second Empire, the abolitionist movement, and the like make for fascinating reading. (The Paraguayan War, AKA the War of the Triple Alliance, has intrigued me for a long time. In that war, Paraguay took on Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay simultaneously, and actually managed to hold them off for a remarkably long time. But it came at a horrific cost; half the population of Paraguay died, and 90% of the adult males. From the Brazilian perspective, it takes on a very different shape, and learning that alone would have made the book worthwhile to me.)
On the lighter side, I decided to reread the first two of Christopher Stasheff's Warlock books - The Warlock in Spite of Himself and King Kobold Revived. (I have read one or two of the later books in the series, but didn't keep them.) I don't think they stand up to rereading very well. Stasheff's attempts at humor don't integrate well with the (semi-)serious plotlines. Maybe it would work better if I could take it purely as humor (a la Asprin's "Myth" series), but he keeps trying to infuse it with more significance than it will bear. (Come to think of it, Asprin does that, too, in the later "Myth" books, which partly explains their drop-off in quality. Only partly, though...)
