Except that you'd get rather unintuitive results: recursion seems to tie nicely to algebra, while iteration seems to tie nicely to analysis (algebra: see group actions, modules, lattice decompositions, analysis: many proofs require chaining inequalities together). But recursion is generally associated with functional languages/LISP/etc., while iteration is much more associated with traditional OO languages (and objects are pretty algebraic, the author gets that right).
I'd say it's probably more dynamic typing versus static typing. Dynamic typing matches up very well with the sort of fuzzy proofs that occur in analysis ("well this is less than that, and that is less than the other, so this is less than the other by a little bit" seems close to "quacks like a duck"), and static typing seems very much like an algebraic idea.
But, as someone working on a math masters, I can say that I prefer analysis and really like dynamically typed languages, so this might just be my pet theory of matching the world to myself.
He predicted me pretty well: spirals, functional, vi. But even though I have a decent amount of upper-level math experience, I can't say whether I really prefer analysis over algebra. I think it just depends on the problem at hand.
Well, what do you consider "upper-level" math? The original article definitely means graduate level classes, not just advanced undergrad.
FWIW, I'm a physicist and used not rows or spirals but the "columns" approach mentioned by one commenter. :) And I probably couldn't tell you what type of math I prefer.
I absolutely love Perl, but "neat and orderly" is not the first thing that comes to mind. I think you'd need to have some sort of literary preference indicator (something like how you brush your teeth indicates whether you like Hemingway or Steinbeck, and Perl or Java), rather than a mathematical preference indicator, to determine one's propensity for Perl.
It doesn't have any impact on your predilection for algebra or analysis, it just makes you a heathen heretic who doesn't understand the greatness of corn on the cob. Unless you have dental issues, or are 6, the corn is to be eaten on the cob.
Weird. I got heavy into algebra, algebraic topology, and graph theory early on and never cared a whit for analysis. I eat like a typewriter.
In my home state of Georgia the two major public universities are very lopsided in their math departments. University of Georgia is very strong in algebra and Georgia Tech is very strong in analysis. I went to both but fit in much better in the former department.
I have a bunch of job interviews coming up - I'm going to ask my interviewers how they eat their corn as a wedge into discussing problem solving strategies on their teams.
Hehe, I'm on both sides and it shows in all three directions. I like all areas of math once I get to know them, and I'm currently rolling numerical computation tools in Haskell :p
(as my job! its pretty great. shoot me an email if that sound fun and you'd like to learn more )
Hehe, I'm on both sides and it shows in all three directions. I like all areas of math once I get to know them, and I'm currently rolling numerical computation tools in Haskell :p
As an algebraist who would be classified under "spirals" here I just think the corn looks more interesting if I leave bands of kernels in the first pass and then pick them up in the second. Definitely sounds like a more algebraist-focused reason for it, too :)
I eat in both spirals and in rows. Sometimes sticking with one method all the way through, sometimes alternating along the way. Additionally, sometimes I take great care to cleanly peck each and every kernel out of its socket. Other times I mow through it like a wild animal, bits of corn strewn around my mouth.
I have always loved math, and I always want to dive in deeper, but can never quite figure out exactly what area to jump into...
A large portion of my math courses in school were Statistics courses (as they were requirements). Spending 4 weeks learning how to use R every single class got old quick. The actual meat of the topics could have been more interesting with a proper approach.
My favorite topics that I have messed with so far are probably Number Theory and Logic. Pointers to resources or book recommendations welcome.
I very much enjoyed and learned from Ireland & Rosen's "A classical invitation to modern number theory". "Number Fields" by Marcus is also good, but that focuses more on the algebraic side of number theory.
I eat my corn in rings, fix a z and then scrape through theta before choosing the next z. It's efficient and it sort-of follows the cornkernel grid.
I'm also more of a statistician who edits in vi and emacs every day and I'm challenging myself with some category theory and abstract algebra because I find it intoxicating.
So, I don't have a clue how to fit into this divide.
Hah, I eat corn the same way. I also use Emacs, but with viper and vimpulse since I prefer modal editing. For programming, I'd currently favor Haskell or Python. My undergrad major was math, and I much preferred algebra. Will I never fit in? At the moment I'm doing formal methods and logic, guess that could've scr me up (just ask Goedel!).
It is akin to choosing a breadth-first or a depth-first exploration (or corn consumption in this case) strategy.
Analysts want to try and explore depth first hopefully to get to the result while algebraists go in breadth first -- to leave no kernel un-eaten in a nice systematic way.
This made me come up with another potential[ly baseless] corollary: Those who eat their corn in rows = those who prefer algebra to analysis = those who try to reduce ethics into a Kantian formula. :D
Spirals, functional, ... Emacs. I haven't done such high math but analysis seems more like how I approach design problems (domains more unique, beauty and intuition for guidance).
I have noticed that when each kernel is firm and can be cleanly separated from the cob, I am more likely to do rows. When I do, though, I usually take a horizontal chunk at a time.
Basic, ASM (6510), VB, Java, PHP, Javascript, C# and several dialects of SQL. With occasional forays into Ruby, Python and C.
I'm not had formal training in Mathematics beyond High School, though I've worked my way though introductory texts to Calculus (single variable), Linear Algebra and Discrete Mathematics (thanks in a large part to reading Yegge's rants and being inspired to learn by the exceptionally smart people on HN - really, I now wish I'd pursued Mathematics further, was in the top 5% at high school but didn't enjoy it).
I once saw a girl who separated each kernel with her fingers and ate it. I have not seen anyone else do that. She was eating in spirals, but I thought this is something worth mentioning because I have not seen anyone else do that.
Fascinating! I've made this the daily poll question on Correlated (http://www.correlated.org). Let's see what other surprising correlations we can make from this!
105 comments
[ 8.2 ms ] story [ 124 ms ] threadI'd say it's probably more dynamic typing versus static typing. Dynamic typing matches up very well with the sort of fuzzy proofs that occur in analysis ("well this is less than that, and that is less than the other, so this is less than the other by a little bit" seems close to "quacks like a duck"), and static typing seems very much like an algebraic idea.
But, as someone working on a math masters, I can say that I prefer analysis and really like dynamically typed languages, so this might just be my pet theory of matching the world to myself.
FWIW, I'm a physicist and used not rows or spirals but the "columns" approach mentioned by one commenter. :) And I probably couldn't tell you what type of math I prefer.
So I guess that means I don't care about efficiency, but need things super neat and orderly. I have always liked Prolog though...
It occurs to me that these would make hilarious fortune cookies.
I absolutely love Perl, but "neat and orderly" is not the first thing that comes to mind. I think you'd need to have some sort of literary preference indicator (something like how you brush your teeth indicates whether you like Hemingway or Steinbeck, and Perl or Java), rather than a mathematical preference indicator, to determine one's propensity for Perl.
I do it so that the kernels come off cleanly and don't get stuck in your teeth (very similar to cutting them off). I wonder where that puts me?
This whole discussion has made me hungry for some corn on the cob with nice butter and salt, damn.
In my home state of Georgia the two major public universities are very lopsided in their math departments. University of Georgia is very strong in algebra and Georgia Tech is very strong in analysis. I went to both but fit in much better in the former department.
I have a bunch of job interviews coming up - I'm going to ask my interviewers how they eat their corn as a wedge into discussing problem solving strategies on their teams.
Great silly post to end the day with
Was a fun read!
Great silly post to end the day with
Compile me confused.
While I'm not a mathematician, I was a math major. I always preferred algebra, and sure enough I eat my corn in rows - so one more data point!
Yes, I am a Forth programmer.
Crap article written for the affiliate links.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridges_Law_of_Headlines
I have always loved math, and I always want to dive in deeper, but can never quite figure out exactly what area to jump into...
My favorite topics that I have messed with so far are probably Number Theory and Logic. Pointers to resources or book recommendations welcome.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4365255
I agree with MaysonL.
I'm also more of a statistician who edits in vi and emacs every day and I'm challenging myself with some category theory and abstract algebra because I find it intoxicating.
So, I don't have a clue how to fit into this divide.
Anyway, a highly entertaining article.
Analysts want to try and explore depth first hopefully to get to the result while algebraists go in breadth first -- to leave no kernel un-eaten in a nice systematic way.
I have noticed that when each kernel is firm and can be cleanly separated from the cob, I am more likely to do rows. When I do, though, I usually take a horizontal chunk at a time.
It's one of the few meals where its' socially acceptable to eat like a pig :)
I'm not had formal training in Mathematics beyond High School, though I've worked my way though introductory texts to Calculus (single variable), Linear Algebra and Discrete Mathematics (thanks in a large part to reading Yegge's rants and being inspired to learn by the exceptionally smart people on HN - really, I now wish I'd pursued Mathematics further, was in the top 5% at high school but didn't enjoy it).
Not the tastiest, but it's quick and it gets the job done.
And yes, I'm a PHP programmer.