I had some thoughts and examples around why it's fun to do math in the biological sciences. It's a fun time and I wanted to share with people some good examples of interesting math in action

jrhawley.github.io/2019/10/03/

semi'joke 

Category theory 

• Positive (incl. 0) numbers, ordered by subtractability, ≤.
• Integers, ordered by divisibility, |.
• Measurable sets / probabilities, ordered by inclusion / entailment, ⊆.

min a b + max a b = a + b
GCD a b * LCD a b = a * b
μ(A ∩ B) + μ(A ∪ B) = μ(A) + μ(B)

What is the general name for these correspondences? And what are other examples?

Is there a place where I could ask questions about math fonts, how to use them, why do things look weird in my renderer and how to fix them?

homologies in informatics 

homologies in informatics 

Interesting. My daughter (11 years) haven't learned about the Pythagorean theorem yet, but they are essentially deriving it here. A good way to approach it, and much more effective than I recall it from when I learned it.

rant 

"The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled."
– Plutarch

Just discovered CryptPad via the FLOSS Weekly podcast. Basically, Google docs without privacy concerns.

CryptPad in their own words:

"CryptPad is a private-by-design alternative to popular office tools and cloud services. All the content stored on CryptPad is encrypted before being sent, which means nobody can access your data unless you give them the keys (not even us)."

It's also Free software.

cryptpad.fr/

Better still CryptPad is on the Fediverse:

@cryptpad

#FLOSS #FOSS

#Logisim is a #logic #circuit #simulator.

Logisim allows you to simulate the interaction between binary logic gates. Simple example circuits like RS-NOR latches and decoder arrays can be created in moments. Complex computers, graphics cards, and more can be created in Logisim as well.

Website 🔗️: cburch.com/logisim/

apt 📦️: logisim

#free #opensource #foss #fossmendations

I heard something very interesting yesterday: People usually argue that constructive systems are weaker than classical systems because they can prove less formulas. However, one could also argue that this actually makes them stronger, as formulas with a constructive proof are "truer" than those without.

Of course that's the whole motivation behind constructive systems. However, I've never seen it related to the notion of "proving power" like this before.

position: -0.6515037686048653 + 0.3768454823639295i
pixel width: 2.4716548773379476e-09

Show more
Mathstodon

A Mastodon instance for maths people. The kind of people who make \(\pi z^2 \times a\) jokes. Use \( and \) for inline LaTeX, and \[ and \] for display mode.