WEBVTT

00:00:01.370 --> 00:00:07.120
Imagine you're in a bar, or a club,

00:00:07.120 --> 00:00:10.130
and you start talking, and after a while,
the question comes up,

00:00:10.130 --> 00:00:12.000
"So, what do you do for work?"

00:00:12.015 --> 00:00:14.950
And since you think
your job is interesting,

00:00:14.950 --> 00:00:19.230
you say, "I'm a mathematician."
(Laughter)

00:00:19.690 --> 00:00:22.080
And inevitably, during that conversation

00:00:22.080 --> 00:00:25.750
one of these two phrases come up:

00:00:25.750 --> 00:00:29.195
A) "I was terrible at math,
but it wasn't my fault.

00:00:29.195 --> 00:00:32.613
It's because the teacher
was awful." (Laughter)

00:00:32.613 --> 00:00:35.582
Or B) "But what is math really for?"

00:00:35.582 --> 00:00:36.610
(Laughter)

00:00:36.610 --> 00:00:38.955
I'll now address Case B.

00:00:38.955 --> 00:00:40.510
(Laughter)

00:00:40.510 --> 00:00:45.354
When someone asks you what math is for,
they're not asking you

00:00:45.354 --> 00:00:48.203
about applications
of mathematical science.

00:00:48.203 --> 00:00:49.554
They're asking you,

00:00:49.554 --> 00:00:53.485
why did I have to study that bullshit
I never used in my life again? (Laughter)

00:00:53.485 --> 00:00:55.924
That's what they're actually asking.

00:00:55.924 --> 00:01:00.124
So when mathematicians are asked
what math is for,

00:01:00.124 --> 00:01:02.404
they tend to fall into two groups:

00:01:02.404 --> 00:01:07.739
54.51 percent of mathematicians
will assume an attacking position,

00:01:08.609 --> 00:01:13.559
and 44.77 percent of mathematicians
will take a defensive position.

00:01:13.559 --> 00:01:17.068
There's a strange 0.8 percent,
among which I include myself.

00:01:17.068 --> 00:01:19.155
Who are the ones that attack?

00:01:19.155 --> 00:01:21.902
The attacking ones are mathematicians
who would tell you

00:01:21.902 --> 00:01:23.849
this question makes no sense,

00:01:23.849 --> 00:01:26.597
because mathematics
have a meaning all their own --

00:01:26.597 --> 00:01:29.144
a beautiful edifice with its own logic --

00:01:29.144 --> 00:01:31.011
and that there's no point

00:01:31.011 --> 00:01:33.558
in constantly searching
for all possible applications.

00:01:33.558 --> 00:01:35.847
What's the use of poetry?
What's the use of love?

00:01:35.847 --> 00:01:38.908
What's the use of life itself? 
What kind of question is that?

00:01:38.908 --> 00:01:40.529
(Laughter)

00:01:40.529 --> 00:01:44.296
Hardy, for instance, was a model
of this type of attack.

00:01:44.296 --> 00:01:46.242
And those who stand in defense tell you,

00:01:46.242 --> 00:01:51.082
"Even if you don't realize it, friend,
math is behind everything."

00:01:51.082 --> 00:01:52.340
(Laughter)

00:01:52.340 --> 00:01:54.218
Those guys,

00:01:54.218 --> 00:01:58.246
they always bring up
bridges and computers.

00:01:58.246 --> 00:02:00.841
"If you don't know math,
your bridge will collapse."

00:02:00.841 --> 00:02:02.286
(Laughter)

00:02:02.286 --> 00:02:05.523
It's true, computers are all about math.

00:02:05.523 --> 00:02:08.008
And now these guys
have also started saying

00:02:08.013 --> 00:02:13.050
that behind information security
and credit cards are prime numbers.

00:02:13.710 --> 00:02:17.379
These are the answers your math teacher
would give you if you asked him.

00:02:17.379 --> 00:02:19.544
He's one of the defensive ones.

00:02:19.544 --> 00:02:21.384
Okay, but who's right then?

00:02:21.384 --> 00:02:23.990
Those who say that math
doesn't need to have a purpose,

00:02:23.990 --> 00:02:26.849
or those who say that math
is behind everything we do?

00:02:26.849 --> 00:02:28.520
Actually, both are right.

00:02:28.520 --> 00:02:30.183
But remember I told you

00:02:30.183 --> 00:02:33.726
I belong to that strange 0.8 percent
claiming something else?

00:02:33.726 --> 00:02:36.929
So, go ahead, ask me what math is for.

00:02:36.929 --> 00:02:39.858
Audience: What is math for?

00:02:39.858 --> 00:02:44.673
Eduardo Sáenz de Cabezón: Okay,
76.34 percent of you asked the question,

00:02:44.673 --> 00:02:47.600
23.41 percent didn't say anything,

00:02:47.600 --> 00:02:48.827
and the 0.8 percent --

00:02:48.827 --> 00:02:51.675
I'm not sure what those guys are doing.

00:02:51.675 --> 00:02:55.175
Well, to my dear 76.31 percent --

00:02:55.175 --> 00:02:59.815
it's true that math doesn't need
to serve a purpose,

00:02:59.815 --> 00:03:02.685
it's true that it's
a beautiful structure, a logical one,

00:03:02.685 --> 00:03:05.537
probably one
of the greatest collective efforts

00:03:05.537 --> 00:03:07.633
ever achieved in human history.

00:03:07.633 --> 00:03:09.732
But it's also true that there,

00:03:09.732 --> 00:03:14.331
where scientists and technicians
are looking for mathematical theories

00:03:14.331 --> 00:03:16.641
that allow them to advance,

00:03:16.641 --> 00:03:20.438
they're within the structure of math,
which permeates everything.

00:03:20.438 --> 00:03:23.585
It's true that we have to go
somewhat deeper,

00:03:23.585 --> 00:03:25.308
to see what's behind science.

00:03:25.308 --> 00:03:28.858
Science operates on intuition, creativity.

00:03:29.348 --> 00:03:32.772
Math controls intuition
and tames creativity.

00:03:33.747 --> 00:03:35.937
Almost everyone
who hasn't heard this before

00:03:35.937 --> 00:03:38.647
is surprised when they hear
that if you take

00:03:38.647 --> 00:03:43.187
a 0.1 millimeter thick sheet of paper,
the size we normally use,

00:03:43.187 --> 00:03:46.505
and, if it were big enough,
fold it 50 times,

00:03:46.505 --> 00:03:52.205
its thickness would extend almost
the distance from the Earth to the sun.

00:03:52.600 --> 00:03:55.201
Your intuition tells you it's impossible.

00:03:55.201 --> 00:03:57.622
Do the math and you'll see it's right.

00:03:57.622 --> 00:04:00.135
That's what math is for.

00:04:00.135 --> 00:04:03.917
It's true that science, all types
of science, only makes sense

00:04:03.917 --> 00:04:07.288
because it makes us better understand
this beautiful world we live in.

00:04:07.288 --> 00:04:08.669
And in doing that,

00:04:08.669 --> 00:04:12.179
it helps us avoid the pitfalls
of this painful world we live in.

00:04:12.179 --> 00:04:15.657
There are sciences that help us
in this way quite directly.

00:04:15.657 --> 00:04:17.413
Oncological science, for example.

00:04:17.413 --> 00:04:20.904
And there are others we look at from afar,
with envy sometimes,

00:04:20.904 --> 00:04:23.464
but knowing that we are
what supports them.

00:04:23.464 --> 00:04:26.213
All the basic sciences
support them,

00:04:26.213 --> 00:04:28.649
including math.

00:04:28.649 --> 00:04:32.366
All that makes science, science
is the rigor of math.

00:04:32.366 --> 00:04:37.242
And that rigor factors in
because its results are eternal.

00:04:37.242 --> 00:04:39.757
You probably said or were told
at some point

00:04:39.757 --> 00:04:42.708
that diamonds are forever, right?

00:04:44.178 --> 00:04:46.392
That depends on
your definition of forever!

00:04:46.392 --> 00:04:48.883
A theorem -- that really is forever.

00:04:48.883 --> 00:04:50.134
(Laughter)

00:04:50.134 --> 00:04:53.486
The Pythagorean theorem is still true

00:04:53.486 --> 00:04:56.601
even though Pythagoras is dead,
I assure you it's true. (Laughter)

00:04:56.601 --> 00:04:57.946
Even if the world collapsed

00:04:57.946 --> 00:05:00.391
the Pythagorean theorem
would still be true.

00:05:00.391 --> 00:05:04.452
Wherever any two triangle sides
and a good hypotenuse get together

00:05:04.452 --> 00:05:05.673
(Laughter)

00:05:05.673 --> 00:05:08.534
the Pythagorean theorem goes all out.
It works like crazy.

00:05:08.534 --> 00:05:11.355
(Applause)

00:05:15.535 --> 00:05:19.407
Well, we mathematicians devote ourselves
to come up with theorems.

00:05:19.407 --> 00:05:21.143
Eternal truths.

00:05:21.143 --> 00:05:23.909
But it isn't always easy to know
the difference between

00:05:23.909 --> 00:05:26.815
an eternal truth, or theorem,
and a mere conjecture.

00:05:26.815 --> 00:05:29.829
You need proof.

00:05:29.829 --> 00:05:31.596
For example,

00:05:31.596 --> 00:05:36.423
let's say I have a big,
enormous, infinite field.

00:05:36.423 --> 00:05:40.132
I want to cover it with equal pieces,
without leaving any gaps.

00:05:40.132 --> 00:05:42.256
I could use squares, right?

00:05:42.256 --> 00:05:46.222
I could use triangles.
Not circles, those leave little gaps.

00:05:46.777 --> 00:05:49.134
Which is the best shape to use?

00:05:49.134 --> 00:05:53.687
One that covers the same surface,
but has a smaller border.

00:05:53.687 --> 00:05:58.396
In the year 300, Pappus of Alexandria
said the best is to use hexagons,

00:05:58.396 --> 00:06:00.243
just like bees do.

00:06:00.243 --> 00:06:01.990
But he didn't prove it.

00:06:01.990 --> 00:06:04.688
The guy said, "Hexagons, great!
Let's go with hexagons!"

00:06:04.688 --> 00:06:07.656
He didn't prove it,
it remained a conjecture.

00:06:07.656 --> 00:06:09.334
"Hexagons!"

00:06:09.334 --> 00:06:12.964
And the world, as you know,
split into Pappists and anti-Pappists,

00:06:12.964 --> 00:06:18.253
until 1700 years later

00:06:18.253 --> 00:06:23.707
when in 1999, Thomas Hales proved

00:06:23.707 --> 00:06:28.641
that Pappus and the bees were right --
the best shape to use was the hexagon.

00:06:28.641 --> 00:06:31.123
And that became a theorem,
the honeycomb theorem,

00:06:31.123 --> 00:06:33.183
that will be true forever and ever,

00:06:33.183 --> 00:06:36.224
for longer than any diamond
you may have. (Laughter)

00:06:36.229 --> 00:06:39.033
But what happens if we go
to three dimensions?

00:06:39.033 --> 00:06:42.944
If I want to fill the space
with equal pieces,

00:06:43.464 --> 00:06:44.805
without leaving any gaps,

00:06:44.805 --> 00:06:46.638
I can use cubes, right?

00:06:46.638 --> 00:06:49.994
Not spheres, those leave little gaps.
(Laughter)

00:06:49.994 --> 00:06:52.957
What is the best shape to use?

00:06:52.957 --> 00:06:57.017
Lord Kelvin, of the famous
Kelvin degrees and all,

00:06:57.607 --> 00:07:03.121
said that the best was to use
a truncated octahedron

00:07:04.791 --> 00:07:07.507
which, as you all know --

00:07:07.507 --> 00:07:09.035
(Laughter) --

00:07:09.035 --> 00:07:10.814
is this thing here!

00:07:10.814 --> 00:07:13.753
(Applause)

00:07:15.778 --> 00:07:17.225
Come on.

00:07:18.025 --> 00:07:20.862
Who doesn't have a truncated
octahedron at home? (Laughter)

00:07:20.862 --> 00:07:22.089
Even a plastic one.

00:07:22.089 --> 00:07:24.846
"Honey, get the truncated octahedron,
we're having guests."

00:07:24.846 --> 00:07:26.240
Everybody has one!
(Laughter)

00:07:26.240 --> 00:07:28.614
But Kelvin didn't prove it.

00:07:28.614 --> 00:07:32.655
It remained a conjecture --
Kelvin's conjecture.

00:07:32.655 --> 00:07:38.177
The world, as you know, then split into
Kelvinists and anti-Kelvinists

00:07:38.177 --> 00:07:39.599
(Laughter)

00:07:39.599 --> 00:07:43.496
until a hundred or so years later,

00:07:46.203 --> 00:07:50.072
someone found a better structure.

00:07:50.917 --> 00:07:56.026
Weaire and Phelan
found this little thing over here --

00:07:56.026 --> 00:07:57.665
(Laughter) --

00:07:57.665 --> 00:08:01.209
this structure to which they gave
the very clever name

00:08:01.209 --> 00:08:03.375
"the Weaire-Phelan structure."

00:08:03.375 --> 00:08:05.911
(Laughter)

00:08:05.911 --> 00:08:08.568
It looks like a strange object,
but it isn't so strange,

00:08:08.568 --> 00:08:10.239
it also exists in nature.

00:08:10.239 --> 00:08:12.844
It's very interesting that this structure,

00:08:12.844 --> 00:08:15.037
because of its geometric properties,

00:08:15.037 --> 00:08:20.229
was used to build the Aquatics Center
for the Beijing Olympic Games.

00:08:20.969 --> 00:08:23.714
There, Michael Phelps
won eight gold medals,

00:08:23.714 --> 00:08:26.875
and became the best swimmer of all time.

00:08:26.875 --> 00:08:30.616
Well, until someone better
comes along, right?

00:08:30.616 --> 00:08:33.015
As may happen
with the Weaire-Phelan structure.

00:08:33.015 --> 00:08:35.633
It's the best
until something better shows up.

00:08:35.633 --> 00:08:40.225
But be careful, because this one
really stands a chance

00:08:40.225 --> 00:08:45.205
that in a hundred or so years,
or even if it's in 1700 years,

00:08:45.205 --> 00:08:50.603
that someone proves
it's the best possible shape for the job.

00:08:50.978 --> 00:08:55.348
It will then become a theorem,
a truth, forever and ever.

00:08:55.348 --> 00:08:58.302
For longer than any diamond.

00:08:58.837 --> 00:09:02.567
So, if you want to tell someone

00:09:03.777 --> 00:09:06.823
that you will love them forever

00:09:06.823 --> 00:09:08.890
you can give them a diamond.

00:09:08.890 --> 00:09:12.421
But if you want to tell them
that you'll love them forever and ever,

00:09:12.421 --> 00:09:14.172
give them a theorem!

00:09:14.172 --> 00:09:15.263
(Laughter)

00:09:15.263 --> 00:09:17.853
But hang on a minute!

00:09:18.783 --> 00:09:20.183
You'll have to prove it,

00:09:20.183 --> 00:09:22.466
so your love doesn't remain

00:09:22.466 --> 00:09:24.299
a conjecture.

00:09:24.299 --> 00:09:27.543
(Applause)