Yesterday (April 29) I was wandering in the mall as I sometimes do, being a good American consumer, and after my fast food meal I stopped into the mall Starbucks. This particular Starbucks runs a trivia contest every day. They put a question on a chalkboard on the counter, and if a customer gets the question right, they get a free drink from Starbucks, even one of the expensive ones.

When I saw the chalkboard I was delighted. The question was, "In superstring theory, how many dimensions do the theorists propose there are?" I had just recently seen a TV talk by Brian Greene about string theory, so it was fresh in my mind. "Eleven dimensions!" I said to the Starbucks barista. "Right!" she said. I could have any drink I wanted, for free. "You are the only person to get this question right, this evening," she said. "It helps to watch Brian Greene on TV," I replied.

I got a Double Tall Cappuccino with Almond Flavoring, a luxury coffee that would have cost a small fortune. I don't know whether Brian Greene would be thrilled, amused, or appalled to find string theory being used as a trivia question at a mall Starbucks. Should esoteric science be part of pop culture? I would love to sit down with a cup of coffee and discuss string theory with Brian Greene; thankfully for him, it won't ever happen. But thanks, Brian, for the fancy Starbucks Coffee.

Posted at 7:40 pm | link

If I am to reach the promised land of calculus, I have to know and be able to work what is called "precalculus." I have actually been in the realm of precalculus for the last couple of years, plugging my way through algebra, geometry, and trigonometry. Right now, I am working with trigonometric equations, which is more nuts 'n' bolts and playing with virtual Japanese transformer robot toys. When I am through with that, I will finally be more or less through with basic trigonometry. If I am weird enough to hanker for more, it will always be there when I want to return. I will also have my archives of trig notes to refer to when I need them.

I have been looking up various curricula of precalculus studies on the Web, helpfully provided by universities in the English-speaking world. I'm trying to figure out what I am still missing. Some of them are encouragingly familiar to me; I can work out almost all the problems in their placement tests. But they also point out what I still need to know, or what I need to review. I am still quite uncertain about working with functions, function notation, and reverse functions. And I need to learn logarithms. Once I get familiar with functions, and row my way through logarithms, then I will finally be ready for Calculus. I will no longer be "pre-calculus."

I vaguely remember logarithms from high school math, mainly because of the craggy Greek syllables of the word. It sounded like an old train going down the track: logarithm logarithm logarithm logarithm… But I dozed my way through high school math, already long-lost to the promised land back there in my teen years. I forgot any bit of information I had managed to learn about logarithms.

If I had somehow seen into my future, back when I was in high school, that I would not only re-visit the hard territory of trigonometry and logarithms, but do it enthusiastically and of my own will, I would be astonished. But my Math Journey is in many ways a return to childhood as well as a re-affirmation of adulthood. Even though high school students now routinely study Calculus, it was not so in my day, especially for girls (why would they need calculus anyway?). So in my mind, calculus, if I ever get there, will be the first "adult" mathematics that I will study. I get to grow up all over again.

Posted at 1:13 am | link