Math is forever | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata
-
0:21 - 0:26You can imagine: You're in a bar,
or, you know, a disco, -
0:26 - 0:31like that, and you start talking
to a girl, and after a while -
0:31 - 0:34this comes up in the conversation:
"and what do you do?" -
0:34 - 0:42And as you think your job is interesting
you say: "I'm a mathematician." (Laughter) -
0:42 - 0:4733.51 % of girls (Laughter)
-
0:47 - 0:52in that moment pretend to get
an urgent call and leave. (Laughter) -
0:52 - 1:00And 64.69 % of girls desperately try
to change the topic and leave. (Laughter) -
1:00 - 1:05There's a 0.8 % made up by your cousin,
your girlfriend and your mother (Laughter) -
1:05 - 1:10that knows you work in something weird but
don't remember what (Laughter) -
1:10 - 1:13and there's a 1 % that
follows the conversation. -
1:13 - 1:16When that conversation
follows, invariably -
1:16 - 1:19in some moment, one of these
two phrases shows up: -
1:19 - 1:22A) "I was terrible at math,
but it wasn't my fault, -
1:22 - 1:25it's that the teacher
was horrendous." (Laughter) -
1:25 - 1:29And B) "But that math thing,
what is it for?" (Laughter) -
1:29 - 1:33I'll deal with case B.
(Laughter) -
1:33 - 1:37When someone asks you what
math is for, -
1:37 - 1:41they're not asking you about the
applications of mathematical sciences. -
1:41 - 1:43They're asking you:
"And why did I have to study -
1:43 - 1:46that bullshit I never used
again in my life?" (Laughter) -
1:46 - 1:49That's what they're asking you really.
-
1:49 - 1:51Given this, when they ask
a mathematician -
1:51 - 1:55what math is for, us
mathematicians split in two groups. -
1:55 - 2:01A 54.51 % of mathematicians
assumes an attacking posture, -
2:01 - 2:06and a 44.77 % of mathematicians
assumes a defensive posture. -
2:06 - 2:10There's a strange 0.8 %,
among which I include myself. -
2:10 - 2:12Who are the ones who attack?
-
2:12 - 2:15The attacking ones are mathematicians
that tell you the question -
2:15 - 2:19makes no sense, because mathematics
have their own sense by themselves, -
2:19 - 2:22they're a beautiful edification with
its own logic built by itself -
2:22 - 2:26and that there's no use in one always
looking after the possible applications. -
2:26 - 2:29What's the use of poetry?
What's the use of love? -
2:29 - 2:33What's the use of life itself?
What kind of question is that? (Laughter) -
2:33 - 2:37Hardy, for example, is an
exponent of this attack. -
2:37 - 2:39And those who stand in
defense tell you that -
2:39 - 2:45even if you can't notice, dear,
math is behind everything. (Laughter) -
2:45 - 2:51They always name bridges
and computers, always. -
2:51 - 2:55If you don't know math,
your bridge falls off. (Laughter) -
2:55 - 2:58In reality computers
are all about math. -
2:58 - 3:01Now these guys always happen
to tell you that behind -
3:01 - 3:06information security and credit
cards are prime numbers. -
3:06 - 3:10These are the answers your math teacher
will give you if you ask him. -
3:10 - 3:13Those are the defensive ones.
-
3:13 - 3:14Okay, but, who's right then?
-
3:14 - 3:17Those who say math doesn't need
to be useful at all, -
3:17 - 3:19or those who say that it's really
behind everything? -
3:19 - 3:21In reality both are right.
-
3:21 - 3:25But I told you I'm of that strange 0.8 %
that says something else, right? -
3:26 - 3:29So, go on, ask me
what math is for. -
3:29 - 3:33(Audience asks the question)
-
3:33 - 3:40Okay! A 76.34 % of people
have asked, there's a 23.41 % -
3:40 - 3:45that shut up, and a 0.8 % that
I don't know what those guys are doing. -
3:45 - 3:51Well, dear 76.31 %, it's true
that math can be -
3:51 - 3:55useless, it's true that it's
a beautiful edification, -
3:55 - 3:58a logical one, one probably one of
the greatest collective efforts -
3:58 - 4:00the human being has ever made
along history. -
4:00 - 4:04But it's also true that there where
scientists, where technicians, -
4:04 - 4:09are looking for mathematical theories,
models that allow them to advance, -
4:09 - 4:10there they are, in the edification
of math, which permeate everything. -
4:14 - 4:17It's true that we have to go
somewhat deeper, -
4:17 - 4:18we're going to see what's
behind science. -
4:18 - 4:22Science works by intuition,
by creativity, and math -
4:22 - 4:26dominate intuition
and tame creativity. -
4:26 - 4:30Almost everyone who hasn't heard it before
is surprised by the fact that if one took -
4:30 - 4:36a sheet of paper 0.1 mm thick,
one of those we use normally, -
4:36 - 4:39big enough, and that I
could fold 50 times, -
4:39 - 4:45The thickness of that pile would take up
the distance from the Earth to the Sun. -
4:45 - 4:50Your intuition tells you: "Impossible."
Do the math and you'll see it's right. -
4:50 - 4:52That's what math is for.
-
4:52 - 4:56It true that science, all science,
not only has a purpose -
4:56 - 5:00because it makes us understand better
the beautiful would we're in. -
5:00 - 5:03And because it does, it helps us
avoid the traps -
5:03 - 5:05of this painful world
we're in. -
5:05 - 5:08There are sciences that grasp
this very application. -
5:08 - 5:10Oncological science, for example.
-
5:10 - 5:13And there are others we look
from afar, with some jealousy sometimes, -
5:14 - 5:16but knowing we are what supports them.
-
5:16 - 5:19All the basic sciences
are the support of them, -
5:19 - 5:21and among these is math.
-
5:21 - 5:25All that makes science be science
is the rigor of math. -
5:25 - 5:30And that rigor belongs to it
because its results are eternal. -
5:30 - 5:32Probably you said before,
or you were told sometime, -
5:32 - 5:35that diamonds are
forever, right? -
5:36 - 5:39It depends on what one
understands by forever! -
5:39 - 5:43A theorem, that really
is forever! (Laughter) -
5:43 - 5:46The Pythagorean theorem,
that is still true -
5:46 - 5:49even if Pythagoras is dead,
I'm telling you. (Laughter) -
5:49 - 5:53Even if the world collapsed the
Pythagorean theorem would still be true. -
5:53 - 5:59Wherever any two sides and a
good hypotenuse get together (Laughter) -
5:59 - 6:09the Pythagorean theorem works
to the max. (Applause) -
6:09 - 6:12Well, us mathematicians
devote ourselves to making theorems. -
6:12 - 6:16Eternal truths. But it isn't always
easy to know what is an -
6:16 - 6:19eternal truth, a theorem, and
what is a mere conjecture. -
6:19 - 6:23You need a demonstration.
-
6:23 - 6:29For example: imagine you have
a big, enormous, infinite field. -
6:29 - 6:33I want to cover it with equal pieces,
without leaving any gaps. -
6:33 - 6:35I could use squares, right?
-
6:35 - 6:40I could use triangles.
Not circles, those leave little gaps. -
6:40 - 6:42Which is the best piece I can use?
-
6:42 - 6:46The one that to cover the same surface
has the smallest border. -
6:46 - 6:51Pappus of Alexandria, in the year 300
said the best was to use hexagons, -
6:51 - 6:55like bees do.
But he didn't demonstrate it! -
6:55 - 6:58The guy said "hexagons, great,
come on, hexagons, let's go with it!" -
6:58 - 7:01He didn't demonstrate it, he stayed
in a conjecture, he said "Hexagons!" -
7:01 - 7:05And the world, as you know, split into
pappists and anti-pappists, -
7:05 - 7:11until 1700 years later,
1700 years later, -
7:11 - 7:17in 1999 Thomas Hales
demonstrated that Pappus -
7:17 - 7:21and the bees were right,
the best was to use hexagons. -
7:21 - 7:24And that became a theorem,
the honeycomb theory, -
7:24 - 7:26that will be true forever
forever and ever, -
7:26 - 7:29for longer than any diamond
you may have. (Laughter) -
7:29 - 7:32But what happens if we go to 3 dimensions?
-
7:32 - 7:37If I want to fill the space, with equal
pieces, without leaving any gaps, -
7:37 - 7:39I can use cubes, right?
-
7:39 - 7:43Not spheres, those leave little gaps.
(Laughter) -
7:43 - 7:46What is the best piece
I can use? -
7:46 - 7:51Lord Kelvin, the one of the Kelvin degrees
and all said, he said -
7:51 - 7:58that the best was to use a
truncated octahedron (Laughter) -
7:58 - 8:09that as you all know (Laughter)
is this thing over here! (Applause) -
8:09 - 8:14Come on! Who doesn't have a truncated
octahedron at home? (Laughter) -
8:14 - 8:17Even if it's plastic. Kid, bring
the truncated octahedron, we have guests. -
8:17 - 8:21Everybody has one! (Laughter)
But Kelvin didn't demonstrate it. -
8:21 - 8:26He stayed in a conjecture,
Kelvin's conjecture. -
8:26 - 8:32The world, as you know, split between
kelvinists and anti-kelvinists (Laughter) -
8:32 - 8:39until a hundred-and-something years later,
a hundred-and-something years later, -
8:39 - 8:44someone found a better structure.
-
8:44 - 8:49Weaire and Phelan, Weaire and Phelan
found this little thing over here, -
8:49 - 8:55(Laughter) this structure they put the
imaginative name of -
8:55 - 8:59the Weaire-Phelan structure. (Laughter)
-
8:59 - 9:01It seems like a strange thing
but it isn't that strange, -
9:01 - 9:03it's also present in nature.
-
9:03 - 9:07It's very curious that this structure,
because of its geometric properties, -
9:07 - 9:11was used to build
the swimming building -
9:11 - 9:14in the Beijing Olympic Games.
-
9:14 - 9:17There Michael Phelps won
8 gold medals, and became -
9:17 - 9:20the best swimmer of all times.
-
9:20 - 9:23Well, of all times
until someone better comes along, no? -
9:23 - 9:26As it happens to the
Weaire-Phelan structure, -
9:26 - 9:28it's the best until something better
shows up. -
9:29 - 9:33But be careful, because this one
really has the opportunity, -
9:33 - 9:38that if a hundred-and-something years
pass, even if it's in 1700 years, -
9:38 - 9:44someone demonstrates that this
is the best piece possible. -
9:44 - 9:48And then it will be a theorem,
a truth forever, forever and ever. -
9:48 - 9:52For longer than any diamond.
-
9:52 - 10:00So, well, if you want to tell someone
you'll love them forever (Laughter) -
10:00 - 10:02you can give them a diamond,
but if you want to tell them -
10:02 - 10:08that you'll love them forever and ever,
give them a theorem! (Laughter) -
10:08 - 10:13However, you'll have to demonstrate,
-
10:13 - 10:16that your love doesn't stay a conjecture.
-
10:16 - 10:20(Applause)
-
10:22 - 10:25Thank you.
- Title:
- Math is forever | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata
- Description:
-
(This talk is from a TEDx event, organized independently to TED conferences).
In this talk Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón gives us his answer to the classic question, what is math for?, but explains it with a touch of humor and stories.
He holds a B.A. in Theology and a PhD in Mathematics, he’s author of various informative talks on his area of study he gives at universities and secondary education centers. He is an oral narrator for children, young people, and adults.
- Video Language:
- Spanish
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TEDxTalks
- Duration:
- 10:40
Sebastian Betti edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Ivana Korom edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Sebastian Betti approved English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Sebastian Betti edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Sebastian Betti edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Sebastian Betti edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Gisela Giardino accepted English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata | ||
Gisela Giardino edited English subtitles for Las matemáticas son para siempre | Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón | TEDxRíodelaPlata |