This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In 2014, the district pushed algebra to ninth grade from eighth grade, in an attempt to eliminate the tracking, or grouping, of students into lower and upper math paths. The district hoped that scrapping honors math classes and eighth grade algebra courses would reduce disparities in math learning in the district.
As I teach my Linear Algebra and Differential Equations class this semester, which uses more computing than ever, I'm thinking even more about these topics. If anything, over the past seven years, my feelings about the centrality of computing in the mathematics major have gotten even more entrenched.
One can view a symbolic expression such as f[g[x][y, h[z]], w] as a hierarchical or tree structure , in which at every level some particular “head” (like f ) is “applied to” one or more arguments. So how about logic, or, more specifically Boolean algebra ? We’ve looked at axioms for group theory and for Boolean algebra.
Some involve alternate functional forms; others involve introducing additional functions, or allowing multiple arguments to our function f. But it turns out that the fact that this can happen depends critically on the Ackermann function having more than one argument—so that one can construct the “diagonal” f [ m , m , m ].
Since the standard Wolfram Language evaluator evaluates arguments first (“leftmost-innermost evaluation”), it therefore won’t terminate in this case—even though there are branches in the multiway evaluation (corresponding to “outermost evaluation”) that do terminate. As the Version 1.0
In the end—after all sorts of philosophical arguments, and an analysis of actual historical data —the answer was: “It’s Complicated”. And there are also foundational questions in computerscience. Lots of college students these days say they want to study “computerscience”. OK, so that’s a lot of projects.
But the computer let me discover just by systematic enumeration the 2-state, 3-color machine that in 2007 was proved universal (and, yes, it’s the simplest possible universal Turing machine). In 2000 I was interested in what the simplest possible axiom system for logic (Boolean algebra) might be.
At the level of individual events, ideas from the theory and practice of computation are useful. Events are like functions, whose “arguments” are incoming tokens, and whose output is one or more outgoing tokens. The systems can be based on Boolean algebra, database updating or other kinds of ultimately computational rules.
At the level of individual events, ideas from the theory and practice of computation are useful. Events are like functions, whose “arguments” are incoming tokens, and whose output is one or more outgoing tokens. The systems can be based on Boolean algebra, database updating or other kinds of ultimately computational rules.
. “Lick” Licklider —who persuaded Ed to join BBN to “teach them about computers”. It didn’t really come to light until he was at BBN, but while at Lincoln Lab Ed had made what would eventually become his first lasting contribution to computerscience. Then McCarthy started to explain ways a computer could do algebra.
For example, we know (as I discovered in 2000) that (( b · c ) · a ) · ( b · (( b · a ) · b )) = a is the minimal axiom system for Boolean algebra , because FindEquationalProof finds a path that proves it. And we can trace the argument for this to the Principle of Computational Equivalence.
In the basic definition of a standard cellular automaton, the rule “takes its arguments” in a definite order. But what kind of integro-differential-algebraic equation can reproduce the time evolution isn’t clear. RandomGraph[{20, 40}, EdgeStyle -> Gray, VertexStyle -> Table[i -> (RandomInteger[] /. {0
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 28,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content