Geometry in Everyday Life - with the London Institute of Mathematical Sciences - Ri Science Podcast

Following on from his Discourse, Yang-Hui He is joined by the London Institute of Mathematical Sciences (LIMS) science writer Madeleine Hall to discuss the past, present and future of Geometry. From Euclid’s postulates to how flower petals are arranged, explore how our modern understanding of geometry has come to be.
LIMS is based here at the Ri, and you can find out more about their research by following the link below.
Listen to the latest Ri Science Podcast, which you can also find here: open.spotify.com/show/3zfY0yz...
New Ri Science Podcast episodes will be released on the last Wednesday of every month, so make sure to tune in for the next episode at the end of March!
Please leave this episode a review to let us know what you think, and to help more people discover the podcast.
• LIMS: lims.ac.uk/
• Watch Yang’s Discourse here: • How geometry created m...
• Get tickets for upcoming talks and livestreams: www.rigb.org/whats-on
• X: / ri_science
Producer: Jeremy Monblat
Assistant producer: Lia Hale, Freddie Rodgers
Editor: Freddie Rodgers
Interviewer: Jeremy Monblat
Music: Joseph Sandy

[@jballenger9240]

I was disappointed that there were not models or examples to illustrate the conversation. I had hoped to SEE the Geometry Everyday life. Perhaps another time. Thank you.

[@CarolynFahm]

What a fascinating discussion.

[@Gleem]

This was way too short imo, very good discussion and wanted to know more than just a basic intro. Get them back on for a "next level" overview.

[@88HaZZarD88]

+1

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Лекция очень поучительная, спасибо!

[@chriscockrell9495]

Geometry is the study of shapes and sizes. Greek - earth measurements Euclid’s elements - Geometry (13 elements) 300bc Shapes - triangle square cube Intersections of shapes. Point, line, plane. Dimensions Gisa Library of Alexandria 3, 4, 5 right angle triangle - engineering law Axiom (rules), theorem, - derivation Definition is not an axiom, an element. Euclidean geometry 5 axioms 9:22 1. Between two dots you can make a line. 2. Lines (segment) can go infinitely in each 3. Point and length for circle 4. Right angles are equal 5. Parallel Lines Geometry on a plane. Issue with 180 degrees. Science vs math Inductive v deductive Differential Geometry Riemann Galileo- math is god’s language of the universe. 15:00 Newton’s principia Mathematica-1687 Newton laws and birth of calculus Geometry in nature. Is sound and frequency found in natural? So is there’s a math for frequency? Sounds like the argument is faulty. And why did they not discuss Kant’s theory of geometry? She clearly believes as Kant believed. 18:30 types of geometry. 9 on Euclid geometry Analytic geometry of Cartesian geometry String Theory - dimensions Manifolds- lol, 10 dimensions. Sounds like a religion. General relativity Quantum Mechanics - being tested? Quantum was probability, not determinism. Give me a break. That is a tough pill to swallow. Space time as 4 dimension. Manifold Lorenz group Lee groups Geometric understanding 26:17

[@peartreedu]

Some visuals would have been helpful, especially on a video platform.

[@reneramirez7777]

Math and Phisics should be teach in more interresting ways ..by interacting with scale objects so all young people can get more involve with this magnificent world of math and science.

[@PetraKann]

Mathematics is not a Science

[@Kittra.kaibyo]

@PetraKann Well why don't you break it down for us then? Why in your opinion, is it not? 🤨

[@PetraKann]

@@Kittra.kaibyoWho is this "us" you refer to? Are you part of a committee? You can't think for yourself or do your own research and investigation and wish to be spoon fed?

[@Kittra.kaibyo]

You were the one here expressing your opinion to those of US in the comment section. I certainly can and *do* my own research but I was wondering if you did, because you just made that statement as though it were a fact, without explaining why *you* think that.@@PetraKann

[@PetraKann]

@@Kittra.kaibyoI am not entirely clear on your position here - are you saying that don't understand how Mathematics and Science work and how they are fundamentally different?

[@er0gauravpratap]

Geometry has been documented and explained in Indian vedas predating Romans, including pythagoras theorem documented by Rishi (sage) Kanad in one of the branch of vedas, Jyamiti (word geometry comes from this sanskrit word). This is contained in Vedic geomtery. Sulbha sutras is the book as repository of the functions and formulae. The intricately made temples standing for more than 2500 years are engineering marvels and prove that vedic geometry (and maths) was far superior of it's time.

[@nHans]

No doubt, all Indian students today learn Vedic geometry (and Vedic math in general) instead of Euclidean geometry in school, right? And every Indian college and university hires PhDs in Vedic math as professors to teach and research Vedic math? And Indian scientists and engineers use Vedic math to build the world's tallest buildings, longest bridges, biggest dams, fastest planes? And the Stonehenge, Egyptian pyramids, and Roman aqueducts were built using Vedic math? And the awards given to Vedic math discoveries are more prestigious than the Fields Medal and the Abel Prize? And Vedic math has already solved all the open math problems of the Western world, including the Millennium Prize problems such as the Riemann Hypothesis, P v. NP, and Navier-Stokes equation? Maybe Vedic math experts such as yourself should publish results from Vedic math that are currently _unknown_ to the rest of the world. For example, according to Vedic math, is P=NP or not? That would be much more beneficial to humanity, rather than claiming retrospectively that some particular theorem or another that everybody knows today was originally discovered by ancient Indians. You could also collect several million dollars in prize money.

[@sakismpalatsias4106]

They are right. It is fun. Certain professors make it boring.

[@nHans]

Speaking of Einstein, in May 2023, the question whether a single tile exists that can tessellate a 2-D plane only non-periodically - the *einstein problem* - was solved. Sadly, the person who led the discovery-hobbyist *David Smith* from Bridlington, England-was some 64 years old when he made the discovery, so he doesn't qualify for the Fields Medal. The Medal is given only to mathematicians 40 or younger. It's a shame that people continue to refer to it as the Nobel Prize for mathematics. Whereas the *Abel Prize* for mathematics was, in fact, modeled directly after the Nobel Prize.

[@ClassicRiki]

Brilliant to find out that whoever made the decision to produce a discussion about an extremely visual topic and is supposedly intelligent didn’t think it was a good idea to have even 1 visual aid. Not bothering to continue with this

[@theextragalactic1]

📐😊👍

[@nHans]

As pointed out in the discussion, Euclidean geometry = Flat Earth geometry. We teach our children A+B+C=180°. And then some of them grow up to become Flat Earthers. Isn't that to be expected, logically?

[@savage22bolt32]

look up Eratosthenes.

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Начало было просто замечательно, по какой причине? В начале рассматривались разные цивилизации с обществами людей которые просто без математики возможности создания из материи упускали. Но, в разных частях Земли образовывались общества, почему же эти общества людей пропадали в небытиё? Это фундаментальные основы, материя как процесс и человек пришедший в этот процесс, но для чего? Математику рассматривать вне контекста общества людей выходит просто однобоко, без общества и математика пропадает как и цивилизация. Что то слабо проработаны основы, а зачем нужна наука?

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Э э э, ребяты, поиски создания материальной частицы процесс философский. Физики упёрлись в математику и утверждают, что основа доказательства математика, очень печально, но, находясь в процессе сложно взглянуть на процесс со стороны и определится что и как происходит. Это сложно назвать заблуждением, это хуже, это тупик.

[@jonnscott4858]

Computer have ruined Geometry since the 80's with modelling.. Look at car design, they all look garbage since then.

[@PetraKann]

Mathematics is not a Science

[@Kittra.kaibyo]

It's debatable.

[@PetraKann]

@@Kittra.kaibyoNot really. Mathematics technically belongs in the Arts Faculty. It's a discipline that deals with axioms, proofs and theorems etc. Science is a methodology that doesn't deal with proofs. The Scientific method validates or refutes the predictions made by a scientific theory. It cannot "prove" a theory in the same way Mathematics does. A good example is String Theory. It is often paraded around as a scientific theory (mainly because physicists and mathematicians largely work on it). It is not. As it stands the predictions that String Theory makes cannot be tested using the scientific method. String Theory is best described as a Mathematical Philosophy. That could change if somebody can work out a way to scientific test its predictions. The scientific method is very clear on it's requirements and has been around since Eratosthenes invented it in Ancient Greece in about 180 BC. Having said that there are Mathematicians that firmly believe or assert that Mathematical theorems and truisms are discovered rather than invented or conjured up out of thin air. Mathematics is used in Science because of its power to formalise scientific ideas and concepts as well as simplifying mechanisms. (everything is debatable)

[@ickebins6948]

Wrong, sorry dude.

[@JingyJingJing]

The floor is all yours

[@PetraKann]

@@ickebins6948So you don't understand how Science or Mathematics works?